As per case facts, on 24.06.2014, the complainant's son Parveen was found injured and later declared 'brought dead' at Chauhan Hospital. The complainant suspected that accused Pawan and his friends ... made Parveen consume beer, caused injuries, and drowned him. A case under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC was registered. The Trial Court acquitted the accused due to insufficient evidence. The applicant appealed to the High Court challenging the acquittal, arguing that the Trial Court's findings were based on conjectures and ignored crucial evidence, especially the 'last seen' evidence. The question arose whether the prosecution successfully proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, considering the circumstantial evidence and contradictions in witness statements and medical reports. Finally, the High Court dismissed the leave to appeal, concluding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt due to gaping holes in the chain of circumstantial evidence, contradictions in witness testimonies (PW-2 and PW-5), discrepancies in timings, and lack of corroboration from medical evidence and recovered articles.