The Supreme Court recently ruled that in cases involving circumstantial evidence, all links of the evidence must be proven to establish the guilt of the accused.

The case in question was brought before a bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, where an appeal was made to challenge the judgment and order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court had dismissed the appeal of the appellant, confirming their conviction and life sentence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution presented evidence to establish three important links in the case: motive, the accused being last seen with the victim, and the recovery of the weapon used in the assault.

The High Court agreed with the finding of motive and the last seen aspect, but declared the recovery of the weapon and blood-stained clothes as invalid. They also stated that the recovery did not indicate the guilt of the appellant.

However, the High Court upheld the conviction based on other strong evidence, such as the appellant’s connection to the crime and motive.

The Supreme Court bench disagreed with the High Court’s conclusion, stating that it did not strictly adhere to the law. They emphasized that in cases relying on circumstantial evidence, the entire chain of evidence must be complete to establish the guilt of the accused and exclude any alternative theories of the crime.

The Supreme Court opined that if the High Court found any link to be missing or unproven, according to established legal principles, the conviction should have been reconsidered.

Based on these grounds, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, thereby overturning the previous decision of the High Court.