Criminal Trial – Circumstantial Evidence -Conviction on a charge of murder may be based purely on circumstantial evidence, provided that such evidence is deemed credible and trustworthy. In cases involving circumstantial evidence, it is crucial to ensure that the facts leading to the conclusion of guilt are fully established and that all the established facts point irrefutably towards the accused person’s guilt. The chain of incriminating circumstances must be conclusive and should exclude any hypothesis other than the guilt of the accused- A court can convict an accused only if their guilt is established beyond reasonable doubt and not merely on the possibility of guilt. The gap between “may be guilty” and “must be guilty” is significant, separating uncertain speculations from definitive conclusions. Thus, it is the duty of the prosecution to elevate its case from the realm of ‘may be true’ to ‘must be true’- Every piece of relevant fact needs to be sewn via the golden thread of duly proved circumstances, in order to ultimately formulate the fabric of guilt. (Para 25)
Criminal Trial – Significance of Test Identification Parade(TIP) discussed – in Ramkishan Mithanlal Sharma v. State of Bombay and Munna Kumar Upadhyay alias Munna Upadhyaya v. State of Andhra Pradesh – when the case of prosecution is based solely upon recoveries of articles, not conducting a Test Identification held as material omission on part of the Investigating Officer. (Para 24)