It is by now well-settled that the motive is a double-edged weapon, which can be used either way and by either side i.e. for real or false involvement.

Unexplained delay in the post-mortem of a deceased would surely put a prudent mind on guard to very cautiously assess and scrutinize the prosecution's evidence. In such circumstances, the most natural inference would be that the delay so caused was for preliminary investigation and prior consultation to nominate the accused and plant eye-witnesses of the crime.

The differences between hanging and strangulation.

In case of hanging and in case of throttling pressure on the neck is a common factor. In the case of throttling by hand or wire, as alleged in this case, a person can resist the throttling. In case of resistance, there will be nail marks on the neck. The person being throttled, if one person is holding his arms and another is holding his legs, will resist by banging their hands on the ground, which would result in injuries to the hands. It is also likely that if the legs are held by hand, injuries may occur on the posterior side of the legs.

It may be said that a finding of guilt against an accused person cannot be based merely on the high probabilities that may be inferred from evidence in a given case. The finding as regards the guilt should be rested surely and firmly on the evidence produced in the case and the plain inferences of guilt that may irresistibly be drawn from the evidence. Mere conjectures and probabilities cannot take the place of proof. If a case were to be decided merely on high probabilities regarding the existence or non-existence of a fact to prove the guilt of a person, the golden rule of "benefit of doubt" to an accused person, which has been a dominant feature of the administration of criminal justice in this country with the consistent approval of this Court, would be reduced to naught.