JUDGMENT

Ong Hock thye FJ:

The appellant appealed against his conviction in the High Court at Ipoh of the murder of one Mohan Singh, a mental hospital attendant, for which he was sentenced to death under s. 302 of the Penal Code. We allowed his appeal and now state the grounds of our decision.

According to the charge the murder was alleged to have been committed between 5 a.m. and 5.50 a.m. On 29 April 1966 that is to say, before daybreak. There was no eye-witness of the actual attack on the deceased; the prosecution case was based entirely on circumstantial evidence. The leading, and indeed only, witness for the prosecution who made any direct allegation against the appellant was Harbans Singh, an 18-year-old son of the deceased, who admitted that, because he saw the appellant about to enter his own quarters two doors away from where the deceased was found murdered in his sleep, he (the witness) assumed that the appellant was the assailant. Since Harbans Singh was the key prosecution witness, his evidence needs to be scrutinised with the utmost care.

In a block of attendants' quarters, housing six families, which are connected by a common outside corridor, the first billet was o