01. Criminal Law
Circumstantial evidence means the evidence of circumstances and is
sometimes referred to presumptive evidence.
Four things essential to prove guilt by circumstantial evidence:
1) That the circumstances from which guilt is established must be fully proved.
2) That all the facts must be consistent with the hypothesis of guilt of accused.
3) That the circumstances must be of a conclusive nature and tendency.
4) That the circumstances should, to a moral certainty, actually exclude every hypothesis except the one proposed to be proved.
5) In other words circumstantial evidence must be both exclusive and conclusive, i.e., it must exclude the hypothesis of innocence of the accused and must conclusively establish his guilt. The circumstantial evidence should not only be consistent with the guilt of the accused and inconsistent with his innocence.
In SHARAD BIRDHICHAND SARDA VS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, a three-judge bench has laid down five golden principles which constitute the “Panchsheel” in respect of a case based on circumstantial evidence:
1. The circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawnshould be fully established.
2. The facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused that is to say should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty.
3. The circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency.
4. They should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved.
5. There must be a chain of evidence so complete as not leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused.
Value of Circumstantial Evidence
Ordinarily, circumstantial evidence cannot be regarded as satisfactory as direct evidence, but sometimes circumstantial evidence may be more reliable than direct evidence nevertheless, it should be of a conclusive character and must point towards guilt. Witnesses may lie but circumstances cannot. It is true that the testimony of witnesses may not be credible in some cases.
Therefore, facts are provable not only by witnesses but also by circumstances.
32 Years of Accumulated Practice
The Firm got itself established back in 1988 and it has been in a consistent effort to provide quality service to the clients. Our firm believes in client satisfaction and it works according to the needs and demands of the same. It has got it's wings spread with a good pace with every passing decade.
The practice area of the firm is not limited, it actually has a multidimensional approach of working.
We have pre-eminent experience in Criminal Law, Civil Law, Matrimonial Disputes, National Green Tribunal, Intellectual Property Rights Law, Arbitration, Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Media & Entertainment Law, Real Estate Law, National Company Law Tribunal, Cyber Law, Labor Law, Company & Corporate Law.
The firm has got well trained and experienced teams for an effective execution of work. We basically focus on the interest of the clients and work accordingly. The team members work in coordination and try to understand minute details of the case. They aim to provide the best legal solution to the clients.
The firm staunchly believes in honesty and integrity. It works according to the ethics of the law and tries to work in accordance with the legal frameworks of the constitution.