As per case facts, the victim, financially dependent on the appellant, had her house demolished under his unfulfilled promise of a flat and money. Both the victim and her son ... feared the appellant due to his property interest, with the victim making a pre-death declaration apprehending murder by him. After the victim was last seen under the appellant's pervasive control, her body was found. The appellant's wife reported his suspicious behavior and mud-stained clothes post-incident, and the appellant had lied about the victim's whereabouts. The appeal challenged the conviction based on circumstantial evidence. The question arose whether the circumstantial evidence, including motive, last seen theory, and exclusive control over the victim, formed a complete chain to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Finally, the High Court affirmed the conviction, finding a complete chain of circumstantial evidence proving the appellant's guilt, noting his motive, last seen with the victim under his control, the victim's apprehension, his lies, and his wife's observations, further strengthened by his silence.