2017 SCMR 2026
Case based on circumstantial evidence---
Principles---
To believe or rely on circumstantial evidence, it was imperative for the prosecution to provide all links in an unbroken chain, where one end of the same touched the dead body and the other the neck of the accused---To carry conviction on a capital charge it was essential for the courts to deeply scrutinize circumstantial evidence because fabricating of such evidence was not uncommon---Minute and narrow examination of circumstantial evidence was necessary to secure the ends of justice---For a case resting on circumstantial evidence prosecution had to establish the case beyond all reasonable doubts---Beyond "reasonable doubt" did not mean any doubt but it must be accompanied by reasons, sufficient to persuade a judicial mind for placing reliance on the same---Where circumstantial evidence was short of such standard, it was better to discard the same so that an innocent person might not be sent to the gallows---To draw an inference of guilt from such evidence, the court had to apply its judicial mind with deep thought, extra care and caution and whenever there was any indications showing the design of the prosecution of manufacturing and preparation of a case, the courts had to show reluctance in beleiving it unless it was judicially satisfied about the guilt of accused person and the required chain was made out without any missing link---Court also had to keep in mind that sometimes the circumstantial evidence collected by the investigating agency seemed apparently believable however, if strict standards of scrutiny were applied there would appear many cracks and doubts therein, and in such a case courts had to discard and disbelieve the same.
0 Comments