Suspicion, howsoever strong, cannot substitute proof beyond reasonable doubt to convict accused in cases based on circumstantial evidence.

Suspicion, howsoever strong, cannot substitute proof beyond reasonable doubt to convict accused in cases based on circumstantial evidence.

The accused was convicted for commiting murder in furtherance of criminal conspiracy by the Trial Court and his conviction was later upheld by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. During the appeal, accused claimed that there was no evidence against him worth the namesake. The evidence of the brother of deceased was that the accused came to his house and informed him that he has killed deceased. Such statement however was not mentioned in oral report of FIR. There was delay of 14 hours in lodging the FIR and same was not sufficiently explained. Witness who claimed to have last seen accused and deceased together, also turned hostile. Suspicion, howsoever strong, cannot substitute proof beyond reasonable doubt. Four co-accused were already acquitted. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction order passed by Punjab and Haryana High Court and acquitted the accused.