Where the High Court reversed the order of acquittal recorded by the Session Court, ignoring the major inconsistencies and discrepancies in the prosecution case, the order of the Trial Court was restored. According to the prosecution, the investigation agency recovered certain weapons at the instance of the accused persons, as per the various "Panchamas" made to the Panch witness.

However, a perusal of the witness's evidence clearly shows that these weapons were actually shown to him on the same day by the accused persons, and the recoveries were made on the next day under the aforementioned "Panchmas." This also adds to the bundle of suspicious circumstances noted by the Supreme Court in the prosecution case.

From a review of the judgment of the High Court, the Supreme Court found that the above-mentioned omissions and discrepancies had not been given due weight while appreciating the prosecution case by the High Court. In the opinion of the Supreme Court, the High Court had proceeded mechanically to accept the evidence of the prosecution, despite the fact that the Trial Court had taken into consideration all these circumstances and had given the benefit of doubt to the accused persons.

For these reasons stated above, the Supreme Court was of the considered opinion that the High Court had erred in reversing the findings of the Session judge. Therefore, the Court reverses the findings and conclusions. In such a case, there is an imperative requirement for a detailed analysis of the evidence and reasoned conclusions. Although analyzed briefly, a vital aspect has been touched upon in the case at hand.