Evidence – Circumstantial evidence – Completion of chain of evidence – Held: There has to be a chain of evidence so complete so as not to leave any reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused – Circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency – The circumstances should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved – The accused ‘must be’ and not merely ‘may be’ guilty before a Court can convict – It is settled law that the suspicion, however strong it may be, cannot take the place of proof beyond reasonable doubt – An accused cannot be convicted on the ground of suspicion, no matter how strong it is – An accused is presumed to be innocent unless proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
S. Arul Raja v. State of Tamil Nadu (2010) 8 SCC 233 : [2010] 9 SCR 356; Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (1984) 4 SCC 116 : [1985] 1 SCR 88 – relied on.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.