https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283654 In a circumstantial evidence case, conviction for rape and murder can stand only where each circumstance is firmly proved, points unerringly to guilt, and forms a complete chain excluding every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. The alleged extra-judicial confession was rejected as inconsistently proved, the last seen circumstance was not established beyond reasonable doubt, and the claimed discovery of the body at the accused's instance was unsupported by reliable panchnama and consistent evidence. Alleged false explanation, minor abrasions and blood-stained clothes were insufficient to complete the chain. With the crucial links missing, suspicion could not replace legal proof, and the accused was entitled to benefit of doubt. en-us Fri, 12 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Oct 2019 18:11:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283654 In a circumstantial evidence case, conviction for rape and murder can stand only where each circumstance is firmly proved, points unerringly to guilt, and forms a complete chain excluding every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. The alleged extra-judicial confession was rejected as inconsistently proved, the last seen circumstance was not established beyond reasonable doubt, and the claimed discovery of the body at the accused's instance was unsupported by reliable panchnama and consistent evidence. Alleged false explanation, minor abrasions and blood-stained clothes were insufficient to complete the chain. With the crucial links missing, suspicion could not replace legal proof, and the accused was entitled to benefit of doubt. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 12 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283654