ORDER 1. This appeal arises out of the judgment of the High Court in which High Court reversed the verdict of conviction and acquitted the respondents-accused under Section 302 IPC. 2. Case of the prosecution is that on 16.06.2006 Jarnail Sing-complainant (PW-6) was celebrating the marriage of his sister at Gurunanak Jhira at Bidar. The respondents-accused viz. Satnam Singh (A-1) and Harmith Singh (A-2) are the brothers of the bridegroom and deceased - Sathvinder Singh is the brother of PW-6. According to prosecution, at about 7.00 p.m. Sathvinder Singh went along with accused nos. 1 and 2 to watch cinema. At 10.00 p.m. only A-1 and A-2 returned and the deceased did not return. When PW-6 enquired about his brother with the accused persons, they told him that they do not know about the deceased. In the meantime, PW-6 came to know that a body was found on the road near Gurudwara and when he rushed to the spot and found his brother with multiple injuries on his body lying dead. On the complaint lodged by PW-6, the case was registered under Section 302 IPC. 3. The case of the prosecution rests on the circumstantial evidence namely:- (i) Motive; (ii) Evidence of PW-6, PW-8 and PW-9 to prove that the deceased - Sathvinder Singh was last seen alive in the company of the accused. (iii) that the death of deceased is a homicidal death; (iv) Recovery of blood-stained clothes, kirpan (knife) at the instance of Satnam Singh (A-1); recovery of clothes and shoes at the instance of Harmith Singh (A-2). 4. The Trial Court convicted the respondents-accused. 5. The High Court in appeal acquitted the respondents-accused on the only ground that there is discrepancy in the extra judicial confession said to have been made by the accused to PW-6 (complainant) and the unnatural conduct of PW-6 not mentioning about the same in the FIR. The High Court has not considered the other circumstances relied upon by the prosecution. Since the judgment of the High Court is not a reasoned order, considering all the circumstances, in our considered view, the judgment of the High Court cannot be sustained. 6. The impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the High Court for consideration of the Criminal Appeal No. 1719/2007 afresh after giving opportunity to the prosecution and to the accused. 6. The impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the High Court for consideration of the Criminal Appeal No. 1719/2007 afresh after giving opportunity to the prosecution and to the accused. Since the occurrence is of the year 2006, we request the High Court to dispose the criminal appeal expeditiously. 7. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 8. The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of.