Mohali, June 4 -- Holding that the prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of circumstances linking the accused to the killing, a Mohali court has acquitted three men in a 2019 murder case. The court noted that the evidence relied upon fell short of the standard required to secure a conviction in cases based entirely on circumstantial evidence. Additional sessions judge Hardip Singh acquitted Gaj Ram, Mahavir Singh and Satbir Singh in the murder case of Sham Singh, whose body was recovered on October 29, 2019 with multiple injuries near Sector 65, Mohali. The court pronounced the verdict on June 2 after a trial that lasted nearly six years. According to the prosecution, the accused murdered Sham Singh, robbed him of cash and personal belongings, and later retained articles allegedly belonging to the deceased. The prosecution also alleged that a motorcycle connected to the case was recovered from one of the accused. While the court accepted medical evidence showing that Sham Singh died a homicidal death, it held that investigators failed to prove the accused were responsible for the crime. The judgment noted that none of the prosecution witnesses had seen the accused assaulting the deceased. The complainant and other witnesses had only seen Sham Singh in an injured condition and could not identify the assailants. The court observed that there was no direct evidence connecting the accused with the murder. A significant part of the prosecution case rested on an alleged extra-judicial confession made before a witness, Ravinder Singh, who later produced the accused before the police. However, the court found the evidence insufficient, observing that an extra-judicial confession without independent corroboration could not form the sole basis of conviction. The judge further remarked that the circumstances did not inspire confidence that the accused would have reposed trust in the witness and confessed their involvement in the crime before him. The prosecution also relied on the recovery of a mobile phone, wallet and Aadhaar card allegedly belonging to the deceased. The court held that such recoveries alone could not establish that the accused committed the murder. It observed that the prosecution was required to prove an unbroken chain of circumstances leading only to the guilt of the accused but failed to do so. As regards accused Gaj Ram, the court found that the prosecution had also failed to prove the ingredients required for the offence of possessing stolen property. Referring to recent rulings of the Supreme Court and the Punjab and Haryana high court on circumstantial evidence, the court reiterated that suspicion cannot replace proof and that every link in the chain must be established beyond reasonable doubt. Holding that the prosecution failed to connect the accused with the murder, robbery or possession of stolen property, the court extended the benefit of doubt and acquitted all three accused of the charges....