https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169721 Recent and unexplained possession of the deceased's gold rings and watch justified an inference of robbery, and the presumption under Section 114(a) of the Indian Evidence Act operated against the accused; the conviction under Section 392 IPC was upheld. The same circumstantial evidence did not support murder, because the prosecution failed to establish a direct and irresistible link between the robbery and the deceased's death by drowning, and no external or internal injury was found; the conviction under Section 302 IPC was set aside. The controlling principle is that robbery may be proved from recent unexplained possession of stolen property, but murder requires a complete circumstantial chain connecting the death to the same transaction. en-us Wed, 03 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 May 2015 16:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169721 Recent and unexplained possession of the deceased's gold rings and watch justified an inference of robbery, and the presumption under Section 114(a) of the Indian Evidence Act operated against the accused; the conviction under Section 392 IPC was upheld. The same circumstantial evidence did not support murder, because the prosecution failed to establish a direct and irresistible link between the robbery and the deceased's death by drowning, and no external or internal injury was found; the conviction under Section 302 IPC was set aside. The controlling principle is that robbery may be proved from recent unexplained possession of stolen property, but murder requires a complete circumstantial chain connecting the death to the same transaction. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 03 Apr 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169721