https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183193 Conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence can stand only where the proved circumstances are firm, complete and inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence; here, the alleged last-seen evidence, recovery process and identification of remains were doubtful, and the cause of death was not proved, so the convictions for murder and causing disappearance of evidence failed. For dishonest receipt of stolen property, the prosecution first had to prove that the recovered articles were in law stolen property; that link was not established because ownership by the deceased and theft from her possession were not proved, and the delay in recovery further weakened the case. The appeal succeeded and the convictions were set aside. en-us Fri, 07 Nov 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Jun 2016 13:08:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183193 Conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence can stand only where the proved circumstances are firm, complete and inconsistent with any reasonable hypothesis of innocence; here, the alleged last-seen evidence, recovery process and identification of remains were doubtful, and the cause of death was not proved, so the convictions for murder and causing disappearance of evidence failed. For dishonest receipt of stolen property, the prosecution first had to prove that the recovered articles were in law stolen property; that link was not established because ownership by the deceased and theft from her possession were not proved, and the delay in recovery further weakened the case. The appeal succeeded and the convictions were set aside. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 07 Nov 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183193