Even the presence of the accused at the scene of the crime was not proven in a murder case. The Supreme Court expressed concern while hearing an appeal filed by a father and son who were serving life imprisonment in connection with the case.

The incident took place 27 years ago in Uttarakhand. The police alleged that Mohammed and his son were responsible for the murder of Althaf following an altercation. Althaf was severely wounded after being attacked with an axe and succumbed to his injuries later.

There were severe lapses in the investigation process. The filing of the First Information Report (FIR) and post-mortem were delayed. Moreover, witnesses were not adequately examined during the course of the investigation.

During the trial court proceedings, significant discrepancies were found in the testimonies of the witnesses. Despite this, the trial court convicted the accused. The Uttarakhand High Court subsequently upheld the life imprisonment, which was then challenged by the accused in the Supreme Court.

After analyzing the evidence, the Supreme Court observed that the prosecution even failed to prove the presence of the accused at the scene of crime. The court expressed skepticism towards the witnesses, stating that their testimonies did not inspire confidence and were questionable. The court further noted that the witnesses appeared to be withholding the truth.