Circumstantial Evidence

The circumstantial evidence murder case Supreme Court judgment India clarifies that conviction cannot stand where forensic chain of custody is broken and electronic evidence fails Section 65B requirements.

The Rohit Jangde Supreme Court judgment clarifies the evidentiary limits of Section 27 and reinforces that circumstantial evidence must form an unbroken chain. The Court set aside conviction citing investigative lapses, partial forensic linkage, and insufficient corroboration.

The Supreme Court restores a trial court acquittal, holding that the High Court erred in convicting on weak circumstantial evidence. The judgment reinforces the Sharad Sarda principles, limits appellate interference, and stresses strict safeguards for confessions under Section 164 CrPC.

SC acquits student in 302 IPC case, holding circumstantial evidence and bullet trajectory failed to prove guilt beyond doubt.

Supreme Court stresses: "Suspicion can't replace proof" while acquitting student in a circumstantial evidence murder case.

Inference of guilt must be incompatible with innocence—Supreme Court sets aside conviction in circumstantial evidence case.

SC stresses on procedural integrity in electronic evidence, setting new standards for digital proof in criminal trials.

Suspicion cannot replace proof: Supreme Court acquits accused in a case relying on circumstantial evidence.

Illicit relationships and circumstantial evidence: A key judgment on motive and guilt in Rajalakshmi's murder case.