The Supreme Court of India acquitted Ravi Kumar Singh Malhotra after finding that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution alleged that the appellant had murdered his wife and one child by strangulation, while another child, aged approximately four-and-a-half years, was presented as the principal eyewitness. The prosecution also relied on last-seen evidence, alleged abscondence, recoveries and circumstantial evidence. The Supreme Court found the child witness’s testimony unreliable because of inconsistencies and circumstances suggesting possible tutoring. Certain allegations made by the child were also inconsistent with medical evidence. The Court held that the remaining circumstances did not form a complete and unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence. The High Court had improperly reversed the trial court’s acquittal without sufficient justification. The decision reinforces the principles of proof beyond reasonable doubt, child witness testimony, corroboration, circumstantial evidence, last-seen theory and benefit of doubt.