Understanding the Elusive Concept of 'Unaccounted for Absence' in Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act

Dude, I've been struggling to grasp the meaning of 'unaccounted for absence' (Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act) for ages and all my textbooks explain it in a way that makes my head spin. Essentially, they say it's about the absence of a person from a place when they should've been present, but they don't give any practical example to make it clearer. Can someone out there provide a real-life example or a simple explanation of what constitutes an 'unaccounted for absence' and how it affects the admissibility of evidence?