In this case, presence of witness on spot found was doubtful and there were material contradictions between ocular testimony and medical evidence. The fact that there was only one firearm injury which had been noticed on the body of the deceased in the course of of the post mortem would belie the case of the prosecution witnesses that as many as five of the accused had fired at the body of the deceased, appellants, held, entitled to benefit of doubt. Hence, they were acquitted.
[Subhash v. State of U.P., (2022) 6 SCC 592]