Summary: Acquittal granted----(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860): ----Ss. 302(b), 387, 404 & 34; Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 544-A; Benefit of doubt Murder, extortion, and misappropriation of property—Benefit of doubt—The appellants were convicted under Sections 302(b), 387, and 404 PPC for the murder of a security guard, Muhammad Hussain, along with alleged extortion and misappropriation of property—The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, extra-judicial confessions, and recoveries—Held, medical evidence was inconsistent with ocular testimony, particularly regarding the timeline of death and post-mortem findings—Extra-judicial confessions lacked credibility as they were not recorded before a Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C., and recovery of cash and pistol remained doubtful—CCTV footage evidence was unreliable due to the accused's faces being muffled and lack of verification of sources—Prosecution failed to establish safe custody of recovered items and connection between recoveries and the alleged crime—Investigative lapses, contradictions in witness testimonies, and failure to corroborate circumstantial evidence with concrete proof created reasonable doubt—In criminal cases, benefit of doubt must be extended to the accused as a matter of right and not grace. ----Cited Case: Tariq Pervaiz v. The State 1995 SCMR 1345 (b) Criminal Evidence: ----Circumstantial evidence; Burden of proof—Principles governing circumstantial evidence—Prosecution relied heavily on circumstantial evidence to prove guilt—Held, circumstantial evidence must form an unbroken chain leading to a single conclusion of guilt without any plausible alternative explanation—Inconsistencies in witness accounts, contradictions between medical and ocular evidence, and failure to produce supporting witnesses from CCTV footage origins weakened the prosecution case—Recovery of incriminating articles, including cash and a pistol, lacked credibility and chain of custody—The trial court failed to address these deficiencies. ----Cited Case: Tariq Pervaiz v. The State 1995 SCMR 1345 (c) Administration of Justice: ----Burden on prosecution; Standard of proof—In criminal cases, the burden is always on the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt—Minor or substantial doubts arising from inconsistencies or weak circumstantial evidence must be resolved in favor of the accused—Trial court’s reliance on flawed circumstantial evidence and unsupported recoveries amounted to a miscarriage of justice. ---Disposition: Appeal allowed—Conviction and sentence set aside—Appellants acquitted of all charges—Appellants ordered to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.