AIR 2018 SUPREME COURT 2027 ::AIR 2018 SC (Criminal) 642 ::(2018) 1 MadLW(Cri) 949 ::(2018) 2 BomCR(Cri) 583 ::(2018) 2 CriLR(Raj) 483 ::(2018) 2 CurCriR 170 ::(2018) 2 AllCriR 1744 ::2018 CriLR(SC&MP) 483 ::2018 (16) SCC 161 ::(2018) 2 Mad LJ(Cri) 669 ::(2018) 6 Scale 16 ::(2018) 1 ALD(CRL) 1020 ::2018 CriLR(SC MAH GUJ) 483

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Madras)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): A. K. Sikri, R. K. Agrawal , JJ

(A) Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.3— Circumstantial evidence - Last seen theory - Requires corroboration - Accused cannot be convicted solely on basis of evidence of last seen together with deceased. It is settled legal position that law presumes that it is person, who was last seen with deceased, would have killed deceased and burden to rebut same lies on accused to prove that they had departed. Undoubtedly, last seen theory is important event in chain of circumstances that would completely establish and/or could point to guilt of accused with some certainty. However, this evidence alone can't @page-SC2028 discharge burden of establishing guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt and requires corroboration.(Para 18) (B) Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.27— Evidence relating to recovery - S. 27 applicable only if confessional statement leads to discovery of some new facts. S. 27 of Evidence Act is applicable only if confessional statement leads to discovery of some new fact. Relevance is limited as relates distinctly to fact thereby discovered. In present case, Yashika Camera which was recovered at instance of co-accused was not identified by father as well as mother of deceased. In fact, prosecution is unable to prov....