AIR 2010 SUPREME COURT 2914 ::2010 AIR SCW 5052 ::2010 (4) AIR Kant HCR 179 ::2010 (4) AIR Kar R 179 ::(2010) 2 CriLR(Raj) 776 ::(2010) 3 CurCriR 350 ::2010 CriLR(SC&MP) 776 ::2010 (8) SCC 593 ::2010 (3) SCC (Cri) 1027 ::(2010) 8 Scale 315 ::2010 CriLR(SC MAH GUJ) 776 ::(2011) 1 ALD(CRL) 233 ::2011 CalCriLR 1 84 ::(2010) 4 Crimes 41 ::(2010) 2 Crimes 355 ::(2011) 4 Kant LJ 505 ::(2010) 1 Ker LT 945 ::(2010) 47 OCR 408 ::(2011) 72 AllCriC 497 ::(2010) 89 AllIndCas 764 (KER) ::(2010) 89 AllIndCas 484 (KER)

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Karnataka)

Hon'ble Judge(s): H. S. Bedi, J. M. Panchal , JJ

(A) Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.3— Circumstantial evidence - Proof on basis of - Circumstances on basis of which conclusion of guilt is drawn - Must be fully established individually - Chain of circumstances proved must be complete - And cumulative effect of all proved facts must lead to inference of guilt of accused alone. (Para 11) (B) Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.3— Circumstantial evidence - Appreciation - Proof of circumstances appearing against accused - Distinction must be drawn between primary/basic facts and inference drawn therefrom. (Para 11) (C) Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.3— Circumstantial evidence - Appreciation - Proved circumstances - Drawing of inference - Regards must be had to common course of natural events and human conduct. (Para 11) (D) Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.3— Circumstantial evidence - Appreciation - Facts established should be consistent only with hypothesis of guilt of accused - Does not mean that each and every hypothesis suggested by accused - Must be excluded by proved facts. (Para 11) ....