Summary
The Supreme Court acquitted four appellants on benefit of doubt in an unlawful-assembly murder case. Vicarious liability did not require each member to inflict an overt injury, but membership itself had to be clearly proved. The evidence placed these appellants, at most, among a larger gathering outside the house; identification and participation evidence had material limitations. Their guilt on the charged offences was not established beyond reasonable doubt.
Issues
- Whether the evidence sufficiently proved the appellants’ membership and involvement in the unlawful assembly.
Held
- A proved member of an unlawful assembly may incur vicarious liability without personally performing the fatal act. The foundational fact of membership must nevertheless be established clearly; mere presence in the larger gathering was insufficient on this record. (¶ 10)
- The Court assessed the limited attribution in the cousin’s testimony, the widow’s failure to name the appellants, and the restriction on the child witness’s opportunity to observe after being hidden inside. Together these features left reasonable doubt about their involvement. (¶ 10–12)
Result
Appeals allowed; all four appellants acquitted of all charges on benefit of doubt and directed to be released unless required for another offence.