Supreme Court: Statement Of Accused U/S S. 313 of CrPC cannot Be Used To Complete An Unestablished Chain Of Circumstances

 On an overall consideration of all the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution, we find that the evidence led by the prosecution is woefully short of pointing to the guilt of the appellant. The witnesses examined were not sure as to whether the appellant was last seen with the victim as they had their own doubts in that regard. The discovery effected under Section 27 of the Act of 1872 was from a place that was ordinarily visible to others, thus, requiring such discovery to be considered with caution. The DNA report in clear terms refers to the bone extracts being of male origin while the victim was a female. The said bones naturally did not match with the blood samples of the victim’s mother and sister. The report from the FSL also does not take the case of the prosecution any further. There is a doubt created as to whether the brown shawl claimed by the prosecution to be brought by the appellant from his mother was the same as the appellant’s mother had denied that it belonged to her. Therefore, the appellant’s statement under Section 313 of the Code cannot be taken as an additional link in the chain of circumstances. In other words, the chain of circumstances has not been formed on the basis of the prosecution evidence. The Sessions Court, in our view, failed to notice these material factors that were very much available on record. It, therefore, erred in convicting the appellant on the basis of circumstantial evidence.  {Para 10}

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.107 OF 2018

SANTOSH GURUNG Vs STATE OF SIKKIM 

ATUL S. CHANDURKAR, J.

Dated: OCTOBER 1, 2026.

Citation: 2026 INSC 1073.

Print Page

Supreme Court: How to appreciate evidence if there is motive for committing murder of deceased?

 There is also enough evidence adduced by the Prosecution to hold that the Appellants had the clear motive to eliminate the Deceased. An illicit/incestuous relationship between Accused No. -1 i.e., Ms. Uma and Accused No. -2 i.e., Mr. Ravi had become known to the Deceased Rajalakshmi & her family, and she had become a stumbling block in the relationship, which swelled the common intention of the Appellants to murder her. The factum that the Deceased has passed away within six months of her marriage also becomes a relevant consideration to attribute culpable intent of the Appellants. {Para 25}

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal Nos. 757 of 2015 and 67 of 2016 +

Decided On: 22.10.2024

UMA and Ors. Vs. The State rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Bela M. Trivedi and S.C. Sharma, JJ.

Author: S.C. Sharma, J.

Citation: 2024 INSC 809,MANU/SC/1139/2024

Print Page

Supreme Court: What would be the effect if nail clippings of deceased is not having any blood which could be tallied with blood group of accused?

33. Though with the ruling out of the circumstances relating to the recovery of the ornaments as (sic) been established conclusively, the chain of the circumstantial evidence snaps badly, we find that there are some other circumstances also in the prosecution case which militate against its correctness. Admittedly, the nail clippings of the nails of the deceased had been taken by the police. There was also recovery of the hair from near I the cot where the dead body was lying and the removal of the hair from the scalp of the appellant by the I.O. for the purpose of their comparison. The report of the chemical examiner has not connected the hair recovered from the cot with those of the appellant. There is no material on the record either to show that the nail clipping had any blood, which could have tallied with the blood group of the appellant. Thus, both the nail clippings and the hair have failed to connect the appellant with the crime.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 123 of 1985

Decided On: 05.03.1993

Surinder Pal Jain Vs. Delhi Administration

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Dr. A.S. Anand and N.P. Singh, JJ.

Author: A.S. Anand, J.

Citation: AIR 1993 SUPREME COURT1723,MANU/SC/0281/1993,

1993 (3) SCC(SUPP) 681,

Print Page

Supreme Court explains how unproven Presence of accused on crime site Snaps the Chain of Circumstantial Evidence into "Slender Titbits" of Mere Suspicion

The up-shot of the matter is that Shrinarayan Sharma did not tell the police that he called out the appellant or that the appellant replied that he will not open the door. Secondly, Renukabai did not tell her husband Ramrao that when she entered the house of the appellant and found the dead body of Sunita in the bathroom, the appellant was present in the house. Thirdly, none of the large group of persons who were present in the house of Ramrao disclosed, what was certainly the most significant circumstance, that the appellant was sleeping in the court-yard while the dead body was lying in the bathroom of his house. Finally, no attempt was made immediately after the FIR was lodged to have the appellant arrested and there is no evidence on the point as to who arrested him, from where, and in what circumstances. {Para 25}

26. As we have stated earlier, the crucial link in the chain of circumstances is the presence of the appellant in his house at the time when the dead body of Sunita was discovered. Once that link snaps, the entire case would have to rest on slender tit-bits here and there. This discussion disposes of the second part of the 4th circumstance part of the 5th circumstance and circumstances (6) and (7).

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 766 of 1980

Decided On: 17.12.1980

Shankarlal Gyarasilal Dixit Vs. State of Maharashtra

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Y.V. Chandrachud, C.J., Baharul Islam and A.P. Sen, JJ.

Author:Y.V. Chandrachud, C.J.

Citation: 1980 INSC 237,MANU/SC/0211/1980.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Whether false explanation or non-explanation by accused U/S 313 of CRPC can be used to complete the chain of circumstantial evidence?

 Another circumstance relied upon by the prosecution is, that the Appellant failed to give any explanation in his statement Under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure.

By now it is well-settled principle of law, that false explanation or non-explanation can only be used as an additional circumstance, when the prosecution has proved the chain of circumstances leading to no other conclusion than the guilt of the Accused. However, it cannot be used as a link to complete the chain.{Para 24}

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 1348 of 2013 +

Decided On: 02.03.2021

Shivaji Chintappa Patil Vs. State of Maharashtra

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Rohinton Fali Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ.

Author: B.R. Gavai, J.

Citation: MANU / SC / 0136 / 2021,AIR 2021 SC 1249,( 2021 ) 5 SCC 626,[ 2021 ] 2 SCR 617

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Under which circumstances the court can convict accused based on call detail records and location data of the mobile numbers used by accused?

 The call detail records further amplify the incriminating previous conduct of A1 on the date of incident. The records reveal that A1 was in constant touch with A2, A3 and A5 before the incident. Further, A3, A4 and A5 were in constant touch with each other. The prosecution has relied upon a chart prepared on the basis of the call detail records of the accused persons and it indicates that all the accused persons were in contact with each other. Even without this chart, the call records are quite clear. To add to it, the location data of the mobile numbers used by the accused persons reveals that all the accused persons were present around the restaurant at the time of the incident. Furthermore, the location of A3 to A6 was also traceable at the same spot where the deceased was found in the Honda Accord car at around 12:05 AM after the incident. In such circumstances, the courts have drawn a reasonable inference that the accused persons were acting in a coordinated manner and had an overwhelming nexus with the offence. 

{Para 17}

 In the Supreme Court of India

(Before Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ.)

Criminal Appeal No(s). 3866 of 2025

Piyush Shyamdasani  Vs State of Uttar Pradesh 

Decided on July 20, 2026

Citation: 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1357. Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Whether the court can convict the accused if Mobile numbers relied upon by the prosecution were not in the name of the accused persons?

 The appellants herein seek to question the findings on the ground that the mobile numbers reflected in the call detail records did not belong to the accused persons. This, in fact, is another incriminating circumstance because the numbers did not belong to the accused persons, but they were found running in the mobile devices recovered from the possession or at the instance of the accused persons. Thus, they were using fake numbers to conceal their identities and to evade surveillance. Notably, A1 was admittedly using two numbers - one registered in his own name and one in the name of his employee (a worker in his factory). Both the numbers were mentioned by him in his original complaint after the incident. The number used by A4 was found running in the mobile phone recovered from him, and the number used by A5 was installed in his phone, which was left by him at his home when he fled away after the incident. When called by the investigators, the call was picked up by the mother of A5 and she disclosed that it was used by A5 only. Again, no rebuttal has been advanced to dispute these facts. {Para 19}

20. The call details reveal that the accused persons were in constant touch with each other using these numbers, irrespective of the persons in whose names the numbers were officially registered. The evidence on record has indicated sufficient nexus between the numbers reflected in the call detail records and the accused persons. If there was any discrepancy in this evidence, the accused persons could have led counter evidence to that effect. However, they failed to rebut this crucial technical evidence. The Court cannot set aside consistent evidentiary findings on bare assertions, without any cogent evidence to support the assertions.

 In the Supreme Court of India

(Before Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ.)

Criminal Appeal No(s). 3866 of 2025

Piyush Shyamdasani  Vs State of Uttar Pradesh 

Decided on July 20, 2026

Citation: 2026 SCC OnLine SC 1357

Print Page

The Wheel of Crime: Understanding "Hub-and-Spoke" Conspiracies and Why They Matter Under MCOCA

 

 Why Should a Judge Care About a Wheel?

Picture a bicycle wheel. In the centre sits a hub. Radiating outward are the spokes. Holding it all together at the edge is the rim. Now replace that wheel with a criminal enterprise — and you have one of the most useful mental models available to any judge trying to make sense of a sprawling, multi-accused organised crime prosecution: the hub-and-spoke conspiracy.

This is not just an academic curiosity from American law. It is a structural lens that helps separate a genuine organised crime syndicate from a loose collection of unrelated individuals who happen to share a common contact. For judges dealing with MCOCA (Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999) cases — where chargesheets often name a dozen or more accused with wildly varying degrees of connection to each other — this distinction can decide whether a prosecution stands or collapses.

Print Page

“From Well to Witness Box”: Two Medico‑Legal Concepts Every Sessions Judge Should Master

 In trials of homicide based on circumstantial evidence, the real battleground often lies not in direct testimony but in medical jurisprudence:

1. correctly classifying the nature of death, and

2. safely accepting identification of a decomposed body without “perfect” science like DNA.

The Supreme Court’s decision in Neelu Nilesh Koshti v. State of Madhya Pradesh is a useful illustration of both points for trial courts, and it is consistent with well‑accepted forensic principles set out in standard medico‑legal texts such as Modi and with classic rules such as Casper’s dictum.

I. Homicidal Death by Throttling: How the Body Speaks of Violence

Print Page

Supreme Court: Whether failure to prove motive in the case based on circumstantial evidence is fatal to prosecution case?

It is trite law in the cases of circumstantial evidence when the chain of circumstances have been adequately proved to link to the culpability of the Accused, motive is irrelevant this principle is further echoed in the case of Mulakh Raj and Ors. v. Satish Kumar and Ors.   MANU/SC/0219/1992 : 1992:INSC:106 : (1992) 3 SCC 43 whereas in it was held as thus:

17..... Undoubtedly in cases of circumstantial evidences motive bears important significance. Motive always locks up in the mind of the Accused and some time it is difficult to unlock. People do not act wholly without motive. The failure to discover the motive of an offence does not signify its non-existence. The failure to prove motive is not fatal as a matter of law. Proof of motive is never an indispensable for conviction. When facts are clear it is immaterial that no motive has been proved. Therefore, absence of proof of motive does not break the link in the chain of circumstances connecting the Accused with the crime, nor militates against the prosecution case. {Para 23}

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 1063/2021

Decided On: 21.05.2026

Chetan Dashrath Gade Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Pankaj Mithal and P.B. Varale, JJ.

Author: P.B. Varale, J.

Citation: MANU/SC/0507/2026,2026 INSC 522.

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Supreme Court: What will be effect of husband failing to give reasonable explanation for death of his wife in his statement under S 313 of CRPC?

The learned Trial Court also considered the statement of the Accused Under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure which needless to state provides an opportunity to the Accused to explain his stand qua the accusations made against him. In the statement Under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure, there is no explanation leave aside any satisfactory explanation in respect of the material evidence against the Appellant. In defence, though an attempt was made to submit that Rupali committed suicide with the help of one chit, the Trial Court on appreciation of the evidence particularly, the handwriting expert's opinion found that the so-called chit had got written by the Accused forcibly prior to the strangulation. The Trial Court also found that the material evidence brought before the Court clearly indicated that the Appellant have caused distraction of the evidence of the offence and provided a false information that Rupali committed suicide. It may not be out of place to state that Rupali after her marriage was residing at her in-laws place. Death of Rupali was in suspicious circumstances and this fact was within the special knowledge of the Appellant being her husband and the Appellant utterly failed to provide a justifiable explanation so as to discharge the burden and this was an additional factor for the Trial Court for holding the Appellant guilty and recording the order of conviction. {Para 20}

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 1063/2021

Decided On: 21.05.2026

Chetan Dashrath Gade Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Pankaj Mithal and P.B. Varale, JJ.

Author: P.B. Varale, J.

Citation: MANU/SC/0507/2026,2026 INSC 522

Print Page

Supreme court explains the law relating to appreciation of evidence of finger prints

7. As noticed earlier the only incriminating circumstance on the basis of which the High Court upheld the conviction of Mohd. Aman is that his finger prints were found on a brass jug in the house of the deceased. From the evidence adduced in proof of the above circumstance it appears that the brass jug, together with other articles, was seized, packed and sealed on April 14, 1983 and forwarded to the Finger Print Bureau five days after - on April 19, 1983 to be precise - through Const. Mohd. Sadique (P.W. 4) along with a letter written by the Investigating Officer (copy of which was marked as Ext. P.59). On the following day, that is, April 20, 1983 the Bureau sent the articles back after taking photographs of the chance prints found on the jug and three other articles (out of the sixteen sent) with a corresponding letter (Ext. P.60). After Mohd. Aman was arrested on April 20, 1983 his specimen finger prints were taken by H.C. Ramji Ram (P.W. 24) and forwarded to the Bureau on May 24, 1983. As the prints were not clear, the same were returned by the Bureau asking for better prints. Specimen finger prints were thereafter again taken on June 20, 1983 and sent to the Bureau. These prints were also sent back and for the third time prints of Mohd. Aman were taken and sent to the Bureau on June 30, 1983. Thereafter the Bureau gave its report (Ext. 115) with the opinion that the chance finger prints found on the brass jug were similar to and identical with his specimen finger prints.

8. After careful perusal of the evidence adduced in proof of the above circumstance we notice a glaring missing link, in that, the prosecution has failed to establish that the seized articles were not - or could not be - tampered with before it reached the Bureau for examination. Though evidence was led to prove that after seizure the articles were packaged and then sealed, no evidence was led to indicate what was the mark given in the seals and whether the Bureau received the packages with the marked seals intact. Indeed, even the contemporaneous letters exchanged between them (Ext. P.59 and P.60) do not throw any light on this aspect of the matter. Rather, other circumstances appearing on record make the prosecution case doubtful in this regard : first, the articles were kept in the police station for five days without any justifiable reason, secondly the Investigating Officer (P.W. 20) admitted that the seal, mark of which was put on the articles, was with him since the time of seizure and lastly his letter (Ext. P.39) forwarding the seized articles to the Bureau contains admittedly, an overwriting as regards the date of its writing/dispatch and no satisfactory explanation is forthcoming for the same.

Apart from the above missing link and the suspicious circumstances surrounding the same, there is another circumstance which also cast a serious mistrust as to genuineness of the evidence.

Even though the specimen finger prints of Mohd. Aman had to be taken on a number of occasions at the behest of the Bureau, they were never taken before or under the order of a Magistrate in accordance with Section 5 of the Identification of Prisoners Act. It is true that under Section 4 thereof police is competent to take finger prints of the accused but to dispel any suspicion as to its bonafides or to eliminate the possibility of fabrication of evidence it was eminently desirable that they were taken before or under the order of a Magistrate.

The other related infirmity from which the prosecution case suffers is that the brass jug, production of which would have been the best evidence in proof of the claim of its seizure and subsequent examination by the Bureau, was not produced and exhibited during trial - for reasons best known to the prosecution and unknown to the Court. For the foregoing discussion we are unable to sustain the convictions of Mohd. Aman.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 1749 with 1833 of 1996

Decided On: 08.05.1997

Mohd. Aman, Babu Khan and Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

M.K. Mukherjee and K. Venkataswami, JJ.

Author: M.K. Mukherjee, J.

Citation: 1997 AIR SC 2960, MANU/SC/0771/1997.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Under which circumstances, the court should not convict accused if prosecution fails to adduce evidence of Ballistic Expert In Cases Of Murder Caused By Firearms?

We find that the conviction on the basis of such evidence cannot be sustained. Apart from that, it is to be noted that even according to PW-11, the gun which was recovered from the car had two empty cartridges (Ex. P10 and P11). Furthermore, the evidence of Dr. Rakesh Kumar Goel (PW-5), who had conducted the post-mortem of the deceased, would show that there was no external exit wound, and wad and pellets were preserved and sealed. It is to be noted that apart from not collecting any evidence as to whether the said gun belonged to the Appellant Manjit Kaur, even the Ballistic Expert has not been examined to show that the wad and pellets were fired from the empty cartridges (Ex. P10 and P11). {Para 22}

23. It will be relevant to refer to the following observations of this Court in the case of Sukhwant Singh v. State of Punjab   MANU/SC/0305/1995 : (1995) 3 SCC 367:

21. .........It hardly needs to be emphasised that in cases where injuries are caused by firearms, the opinion of the ballistic expert is of a considerable importance where both the firearm and the crime cartridge are recovered during the investigation to connect an Accused with the crime. Failure to produce the expert opinion before the trial court in such cases affects the creditworthiness of the prosecution case to a great extent.

24. No doubt that this case has been recently distinguished by a three-Judges Bench of this Court in the case of Gulab v. State of Uttar Pradesh MANU/SC/1210/2021 : (2022) 12 SCC 677, relying on the earlier judgments of this Court in the cases of Gurucharan Singh v. State of Punjab   MANU/SC/0136/1962 : [1963] 3 SCR 585 and State of Punjab v. Jugraj Singh   MANU/SC/0098/2002 : (2002) 3 SCC 234.

25. However, it is to be noted that the case of Jugraj Singh (supra) was a case of direct evidence, where there was evidence of two eye-witnesses. The present case is a case based on circumstantial evidence. In view of the serious doubt with regard to the credibility of the witnesses on the issue of extra-judicial confession and last seen theory, the failure to examine Ballistic Expert would, in our opinion, be a glaring defect in the prosecution case. We are, therefore, of the considered view that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and, as such, the Accused are entitled to benefit of doubt.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal Nos. 1635 of 2010 and 1714 of 2010 

Decided On: 05.07.2023

Pritinder Singh Vs. The State of Punjab

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

B.R. Gavai and Sanjay Karol, JJ.

Author: B.R. Gavai, J.

Citation: 2023 INSC 614, MANU/SC/0754/2023.

Print Page

Supreme Court: Under which circumstances Test identification Parade of accused becomes unreliable?

 Circumstance Six: Test Identification Parade

38. The investigating authorities conducted a test identification parade - asking PW-5 to identify the Appellant- convict from a long line of habitual offenders. He did so thrice. This has been taken as another circumstance against the convict Appellant. Before proceeding to the merits of this circumstance, let us appreciate the law on this point.

38.1 No provision of law casts an obligation upon the investigating authorities to conduct a test identification parade. If it is conducted, the provision that governs is Section 162, Code of Criminal Procedure [See: Munshi Singh Gautam v. State of M.P.   MANU/SC/0964/2004 : 2004:INSC:648 : (2005) 9 SCC 631; Malkhansingh v. State of M.P.   MANU/SC/0445/2003 : 2003:INSC:308 : (2003) 5 SCC 746; Visveswaran v. State   MANU/SC/0352/2003 : 2003:INSC:262 : (2003) 6 SCC 73; and Ashok Debbarma v. State of Tripura   MANU/SC/0168/2014 : 2014:INSC:167 : (2014) 4 SCC 747.]

38.2 The onus to show that the T.I.P. has been conducted in accordance with law lies on the prosecution, and only after this burden stands prima facie discharged, does the question of considering objections in this regard arise. [See: Umesh Chandra v. State of Uttarakhand   MANU/SC/1412/2021 : (2021) 17 SCC 616.]

38.3 It is not a substantive piece of evidence. Its only purpose is for the investigating authorities to analyse the correctness, or lack thereof, of the direction in which they are steering the investigation. [See: Hari Nath v. State of U.P.   MANU/SC/0229/1987 : 1987:INSC:315 : (1988) 1 SCC 14; and Iqbal v. State of U.P.   MANU/SC/0559/2015 : 2015:INSC:387 : (2015) 6 SCC 623]

38.4 If the prosecution does not establish, by examination of witnesses to the T.I.P., and the Magistrate entrusted therewith, it cannot be said that it was conducted per law. [See: Umesh Chandra (supra).]

38.5 There is no hard and fast Rule about delay in conducting T.I.P. being fatal to the case of the prosecution. In certain cases, relatively small delay has been considered fatal yet in others, a delay of as much as 40 days is not fatal. [See: Raja v. State   MANU/SC/1717/2019 : 2019:INSC:1346 : (2020) 15 SCC 562.]

38.6 The prosecution must establish that prior to the test identification parade being conducted, the witness had no opportunity to see the Accused. In other words, the Accused must be kept 'baparda'. [See: Gireesan Nair v. State of Kerala   MANU/SC/1486/2022 : 2022:INSC:1199 : (2023) 1 SCC 180; and Budhsen v. State of U.P.   MANU/SC/0103/1970 : 1970:INSC:131 : (1970) 2 SCC 128.]

38.7 If the above has not been ensured, the evidence of the T.I.P. becomes inadmissible. It has also been held that if, prior to the T.I.P. the witness has the opportunity to see even the photograph of the Accused person, such process becomes inconsequential. [See: Maya Kaur Baldevsingh Sardar v. State of Maharashtra   MANU/SC/7994/2007 : 2007:INSC:1014 : (2007) 12 SCC 654; C. Muniappan v. State of T.N.   MANU/SC/0655/2010 : 2010:INSC:553 : (2010) 9 SCC 567; and Sk. Umar Ahmed Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra   MANU/SC/1025/1998 : 1998:INSC:202 : (1998) 5 SCC 103.]

38.8 Dock identification by the informant, even in the absence of T.I.P., can be accepted, but generally, as a matter of prudence, a witness's identification of an Accused in Court is sought to be corroborated by the identification by the former of the latter in previously conducted identification proceedings [Rajesh v. State of Haryana   MANU/SC/0818/2020 : 2020:INSC:628 : (2021) 1 SCC 118; and Mukesh v. State (NCT of Delhi)   MANU/SC/0575/2017 : 2017:INSC:448 : (2017) 6 SCC 1.]

38.9 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case at hand, it is open for the Court to draw an adverse inference against the witness, should they put forth a refusal to participate in the identification proceedings. [See: Mohd. Anwar v. State (NCT of Delhi)   MANU/SC/0602/2020 : 2020:INSC:496 : (2020) 7 SCC 391.]

39. It is plain as day that the above principles were not observed in the present case. We are constrained to record our astonishment as to how the Courts below considered the identification proceedings as a circumstance accruing against the Appellant-convict. It is undoubted that PW-50, in his testimony, gives sufficient detail as to the procedure followed in conducting the T.I.P., and on that count, no assault can be made thereon, however, as the preceding paragraph establishes, there are other equally crucial factors. It is a matter of record that PW-5 (the witness who participated in the T.I.P.), in his testimony, stated that about a week after he gave information to the concerned police about the incident of 14th May, 2011, he saw the Appellant- convict at the said police station. Most importantly, as has come on record, the police officials had informed him about the Appellant-convict committing the crime. As held by Budhsen (supra) as far back as the year 1970, by Suryamoorthy v. Govindaswamy   MANU/SC/0591/1989 : (1989) 3 SCC 24 in 1989, Suresh Chandra Bahri v. State of Bihar   MANU/SC/0500/1994 : 1994:INSC:246 : 1995 Supp. (1) SCC 80 in 1995, Mulla v. State of U.P   MANU/SC/0091/2010 : 2010:INSC:89 : (2010) 3 SCC 508 in 2010, i.e., well before the judgment of the learned Trial Court was pronounced, that if the said witness had the opportunity to see the Accused, in any form, after the incident the subject matter of testimony, but prior to the identification proceedings, it would render the same to be ineffective. Then, in our view, the courts below committed an error of elephantine proportions in considering these proceedings as forming one of the chains of circumstances against the Appellant-convict.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 1672 of 2019 

Decided On: 15.07.2025

Kattavellai Vs. State of Tamilnadu

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.

Author: Sanjay Karol, J.

Citation: 2025 INSC 845, MANU/SC/0917/2025.

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Supreme Court Guidelines Regarding procedure to be followed regarding DNA evidence from the point of collection to the logical end, i.e., conviction or acquittal of the Accused,

 This lack of a common procedure to be followed, is concerning. As such, we issue the following directions which shall be followed henceforth, in all cases where DNA Evidence is involved:

1. The collection of DNA samples once made after due care and compliance of all necessary procedure including swift and appropriate packaging including a) FIR number and date; b) Section and the statute involved therein; c) details of I.O., Police station; and d) requisite serial number shall be duly documented. The document recording the collection shall have the signatures and designations of the medical professional present, the investigating officer and independent witnesses. Here only we may clarify that the absence of independent witnesses shall not be taken to be compromising to the collection of such evidence, but the efforts made to join such witnesses and the eventual inability to do so shall be duly put down in record.

2. The Investigating Officer shall be responsible for the transportation of the DNA evidence to the concerned police station or the hospital concerned, as the case may be. He shall also be responsible for ensuring that the samples so taken reach the concerned forensic science laboratory with dispatch and in any case not later than 48- hours from the time of collection. Should any extraneous circumstance present itself and the 48-hours timeline cannot be complied with, the reason for the delay shall be duly recorded in the case diary. Throughout, the requisite efforts be made to preserve the samples as per the requirement corresponding to the nature of the sample taken.

3. In the time that the DNA samples are stored pending trial appeal etc., no package shall be opened, altered or resealed without express authorisation of the Trial Court acting upon a statement of a duly qualified and experienced medical professional to the effect that the same shall not have a negative impact on the sanctity of the evidence and with the Court being assured that such a step is necessary for proper and just outcome of the Investigation/Trial.

4. Right from the point of collection to the logical end, i.e., conviction or acquittal of the Accused, a Chain of Custody Register shall be maintained wherein each and every movement of the evidence shall be recorded with counter sign at each end thereof stating also the reason therefor. This Chain of Custody Register shall necessarily be appended as part of the Trial Court record. Failure to maintain the same shall render the I.O. responsible for explaining such lapse.

The Directors General of Police of all the States shall prepare sample forms of the Chain of Custody Register and all other documentation directed above and ensure its dispatch to all districts with necessary instruction as may be required. {Para 44}

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 1672 of 2019 

Decided On: 15.07.2025

Kattavellai Vs. State of Tamilnadu

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta, JJ.

Author: Sanjay Karol, J.

Citation: 2025 INSC 845, MANU/SC/0917/2025.

Print Page

What is meaning of last seen theory?

 Last seen theory means that if the accused was last seen in the company of the deceased, and the time gap between that point and the death is so small that intervention by any other person becomes unlikely, the court may draw an adverse inference against the accused.

30-second answer

Print Page

SC Acquits Woman Accused Of Killing New Born Baby Girl

 By considering the oral evidence on record and taking into consideration the post-mortem report, the Appellant was convicted for the offence by attributing motive that she has strangulated her because the new born is a baby girl. There is no evidence on record to draw such a conclusion against the Appellant. It is clear from the evidence on record, as deposed by PW-7, they already had a male child of the age of 5 years. He has also stated that as they already had a male child, they wanted a female child to complete the family. He further stated that his brother had three daughters which shows that the family was not orthodox and was not averse to have a female child. It is clear from the evidence on record that immediately after birth the baby was put in incubator with oxygen mask and it is also clear that she has not opened the eyes and she did not cry. PW-7, though he was declared hostile by the prosecution, but he has stated in his deposition that he was called to the labour room at 05:00 p.m. to inform that his baby had expired and he was not allowed to see her wife who is the Appellant herein upto 26th August 2007 on which date dead body of the baby girl was sent for post-mortem. It is also to be noticed that there is no reason for sending the body for post-mortem on 26th August when the baby girl died on 24th August 2007. At the same time, it is also to be noticed that the crime was registered against the Appellant only on 31st August 2007. It is true that in the post-mortem, doctor has opined that death is due to asphyxia and there were marks of strangulation, but at the same time if totality of evidence on record is considered, motive is not established and it is totally unnatural for the Appellant-mother to kill her own baby by strangulation. It is also clear from the record that in view of the drugs administered on her she was sleepy and drowsy. In absence of any clear evidence on record, High Court as well as the Trial Court committed error, in attributing motive to the Appellant that, she has killed her baby as she was female. The Trial court as well as the High Court has based conviction on presumptions without any basis. It is fairly well settled that to base conviction solely on the circumstantial evidence, unless chain of circumstances is established conviction cannot be recorded. From the totality of evidence on record it is clear that the baby girl was put in incubator with an oxygen mask and she has also not opened her eyes and she did not cry after birth. There was a possibility of natural death. Though the doctor has opined in the post-mortem report, the cause of death is asphyxia but in absence of any clear evidence on record it is not safe to convict the Appellant for the offence Under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. As the evidence on record is not sufficient to bring home the guilt of the Accused, beyond reasonable doubt. We are of the considered view that the Appellant is entitled to benefit of doubt, for acquittal from the charge framed against her. {Para 10}

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 1268 of 2013 +

Decided On: 17.12.2019

Manju Vs. State of Delhi

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and R. Subhash Reddy, JJ.

Author: R. Subhash Reddy, J.

Citation: 2019 INSC 1385, MANU/SC/1763/2019

Print Page

Supreme Court: Disclosure Statements U/S. 27 Evidence Act Alone is Not Enough For Conviction Unless Chain Of Evidence Is Complete

(viii) The prosecution case mainly rested upon the deposition given by PW-5 so-called eye-witness as well as on the basis of circumstantial evidence. The alleged motive, last seen theory, recovery, and conduct of the Accused were sought to be relied upon to establish the chain of circumstances.

(ix) Upon an exhaustive appreciation of the entire evidence on record, the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Gadag, by judgment dated 30.03.2019, acquitted all the Accused of all charges. The Trial Court recorded findings that the prosecution had failed to establish a complete and unbroken chain of circumstances pointing only towards the guilt of the Accused. The alleged motive was held to be weak and speculative; the theory of conspiracy was found to be unsubstantiated; and crucial links such as last seen together and recovery were not proved beyond reasonable doubt.

23. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents have mainly placed reliance upon confessional statements of the Accused and, thereafter, the discovery of the dead body of the deceased from the canal. We are of the view that simply relying upon the so-called confessional statements of the Accused, and discovery of dead body which is also not duly proved, conviction cannot be recorded. Thus, looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the present case the sole so-called eyewitness, PW-5, cannot be said to be reliable and the other circumstances upon which the prosecution has placed reliance are insufficient to conclude that the Accused have committed the alleged offences. The prosecution has failed to complete the entire chain of circumstances from which it can be established that the Accused had committed the alleged offences. We are of the further view that the view taken by the Trial Court was a plausible view based upon the evidence led by the prosecution.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal Nos. 2120-2121 of 2024 and 2542-2543 of 2024

Decided On: 16.01.2026

Tulasareddi and Ors. Vs. The State of Karnataka and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

V.M. Pancholi and Sanjay Karol, JJ.

Author: V.M. Pancholi, J.

Citation:  MANU/SC/0072/2026.

Print Page

District Judge Interview Questions on Evidentiary value of Crime Scene Recreation

Question 1: Basic Concept and Definition

Q: What do you understand by crime scene recreation? How does it differ from crime scene re-enactment?

Answer: Crime scene recreation, also known as reconstruction, is the forensic science discipline where investigators gain explicit knowledge of the series of events surrounding a crime using deductive and inductive reasoning, physical evidence, scientific methods, and their interrelationships. It systematically addresses six critical questions: what happened, how it happened, where, when, who was involved, and why.

Print Page

Delhi HC: Court Can Seek Mobile Location of Spouse to Ascertain Adultery in Matrimonial Disputes: A Detailed Analysis

 

 Introduction

The intersection of digital privacy rights and matrimonial law has become a critical area of jurisprudence in contemporary India. The recent Delhi High Court judgment in Ms. Tanvi Chaturvedi v. Ms. Smita Shrivastava & Anr.Citation: 2025 DHC 7474 DB.  marks a significant milestone in establishing the legal framework for courts to seek mobile location data and Call Detail Records (CDRs) to ascertain adultery in matrimonial disputes. This comprehensive analysis examines the evolving legal position on courts' authority to collect digital evidence in matrimonial proceedings while balancing fundamental privacy rights with the imperative of fair trial.

Legal Framework for Mobile Location Data Collection

Constitutional Foundation

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page