The Court of Appeal found that the conviction of the appellant was based on strong circumstantial evidence, including the fact that he was last seen with the deceased, the recovery of his cap and the deceased's underpants near the riverbank, and the subsequent recovery of the deceased's body with injuries consistent with assault. The court held that the chain of circumstantial evidence was complete and pointed unerringly to the appellant as the perpetrator, with no other reasonable hypothesis. The doctrine of last seen was properly applied, and the appellant failed to provide any reasonable explanation for the deceased's fate. However, the court found that the mandatory death sentence imposed was unconstitutional in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Muruatetu, and thus set aside the sentence and remitted the case for resentencing by a competent judge.