https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456951 A conviction based on circumstantial evidence cannot stand unless each incriminating circumstance is clearly established and put fairly to the accused under Section 313. The first appellant's conviction was set aside because the evidence did not show that he was last seen with the deceased near the time of death, and the alleged motive was unsupported by the record. The second appellant's trial was vitiated because the Section 313 questioning was lengthy, composite, and not framed in a clear or separate manner, causing prejudice and denying a fair opportunity to explain the circumstances. The matter was remanded for fresh proceedings from the Section 313 stage. en-us Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Aug 2024 10:54:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456951 A conviction based on circumstantial evidence cannot stand unless each incriminating circumstance is clearly established and put fairly to the accused under Section 313. The first appellant's conviction was set aside because the evidence did not show that he was last seen with the deceased near the time of death, and the alleged motive was unsupported by the record. The second appellant's trial was vitiated because the Section 313 questioning was lengthy, composite, and not framed in a clear or separate manner, causing prejudice and denying a fair opportunity to explain the circumstances. The matter was remanded for fresh proceedings from the Section 313 stage. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 15 Oct 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456951