Supreme Court Lays Down Principles for Evaluating Circumstantial Evidence in Criminal Cases

The Supreme Court has clarified key principles for evaluating circumstantial evidence in criminal cases.

In a rape-murder case involving a 9-year-old girl, the bench upheld the conviction, emphasizing the need for a strong chain of evidence linking the accused to the crime.

The Court highlighted that each link in the evidence must be individually proven and collectively form an unbroken chain pointing only to the accused's guilt.

The Court outlined five principles for evaluating circumstantial evidence: assess each witness's testimony in full, clearly state reasonable inferences, prove each link in the evidence chain individually and collectively, explain reasons for accepting or rejecting evidence, and ensure guilt is established beyond reasonable doubt by eliminating alternate hypotheses.

This judgment is an important guide for lower courts in the effect that cases relying on circumstantial evidence demand special care in assessment.