August 27, 2018
Circumstantial evidence– In this recent case, the High Court of Allahabad acquitted the accused on the ground that the chain of events was not established by the Prosecution and that in a case resting on circumstantial evidence it is incumbent the prosecution must establish all the pieces of incriminating circumstances by reliable and clinching evidence and circumstances.
Case name: Sujeet v. State of U.P.
The High Court of Allahabad noted in the case that the chain of events has not been established by the prosecution and that it was incumbent on the prosecution to have established the motive ascribed to the accused regarding lost of money due to gambling and the quarrels between the accused and the deceased which was not done.
The case of prosecution to establish guilt of the accused in the present case rested on circumstantial evidence, thus while substantiating on the importance of circumstantial evidence the High Court opined that the prosecution must establish all the pieces of incriminating circumstances by reliable and clinching evidence and the circumstances, so proved, must form such a chain of events so complete as would permit no conclusion other than one of guilt of the accused.
Reference in the case was also made to Apex Court’s judgment in the case of Ganpat Singh Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, whereby the Supreme Court reiterated the law relating to circumstantial evidence as follows and held that “The normal principle in a case based on circumstantial evidence is that the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn must be cogently and firmly established; that those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused; that the circumstances taken cumulatively should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and they should be incapable of explanation on any hypothesis other than that of the guilt of the accused and inconsistent with his innocence.”
The entire case can be accessed here.