As per case facts, accused No.1, the mother, and accused No.2, the maternal grandmother, were charged with the murder of a 6-day-old child. The prosecution alleged accused No.1 first attempted ... to strangulate and then smashed the child's head, while accused No.2 concealed the crime. The Trial Court convicted both accused. Being aggrieved, they appealed. The question arose whether the Trial Court erred in convicting the accused based on the prosecution's evidence, considering contradictory medical reports and witness testimonies. Finally, the Court found that initial medical exams reported no injuries, contradicting the post-mortem report which noted visible head injuries but lacked detail on their age. The key prosecution witness (P.W.1, the father) was deemed unreliable due to contradictions, admissions of fabricating the case with police connivance, and personal enmity. The Court concluded the prosecution failed to establish homicide and the accused were falsely implicated, thus setting aside the conviction and allowing the appeal.