Gauhati High Court Acquits Man Accused Of Killing Mother & Injuring Brother, Says Incriminating Circumstances Were Not Conclusively Proved
Case: Mohan Kumar v. The State of Assam & Anr.
Coram: Justice Michael Zothankhuma and Justice Malasri Nandi
Case No.: Crl.A./295/2022
Court Observation: “In a case based on circumstantial evidence not only each of the incriminating circumstances have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt, but those incriminating circumstances must constitute a chain so far complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability it is the accused-appellant who has committed the crime and further, cumulatively, they must exclude all hypothesis consistent with the innocence of the accused-appellant and inconsistent with his guilt.”
“Admittedly, this is a case based on circumstantial evidence. It is a trite law that to convict an accused on the basis of circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt each of incriminating circumstances on which it proposes to rely”
“Section 106 of the Evidence Act does not absolve the prosecution of discharging its primary burden of proving the prosecution case beyond reasonable doubt. It is only when the prosecution has led evidence which, if believed, will sustain a conviction, or which makes out a prima facie case, the question arises of considering facts of which the burden of proof would lie upon the accused.”
Previous Posts
Keywords
Gauhati High Court Acquits Man
