Legal Service India.

com

Articles
legal professional, students and yes you too can voice your
opinion on any point of law.
Chat with us (6 PM - 9 PM IST)


Legal News Legal Advice Judgments Income-Tax forms Forum Find a lawyer Lawyers Membership
Search On: Laws in India


Free Supreme court Judgments......
Available for Download Click here
Online Copyright Registration
Click here

Article Archive
Articles - 2008 Articles - 2007 Articles submitted in 2006 Articles - 2000-05





Circumstantial Evidence

Category: Home \ Criminal law
Article: Circumstantial Evidence : Realm of Reality
Circumstantial evidence is used in criminal courts to decide the fate of
accused by establishing guilt or innocence through reasoning. According
to Benthem witnesses are the "eyes and ears of justice". But testimony of
witnesses is not always credible; therefore, facts are provable not only by
witnesses but also by circumstances.
In words of Stephen Leacock,
My evidence for this assertion is all indirect, its what we call
circumstantial evidence the same the people are hang for. Giving
the importance of circumstantial evidence in criminal cases and
discussing the present role of circumstantial evidence, in nailing the two
most leading cases, of Manu Sharma and Santosh Kumar, the same
evidence that the trial court had dismissed as being insufficient or
inadequate for conviction. Although it seems self-evident, that meaning of
evidence must be articulated first, before the next steps in the analytical
process may be pursued.
Historical Background of Circumstantial Evidence
Circumstantial evidence is not considered to be proof that something
happened but it is often useful as a guide for further investigation. An
example from genealogy would be that if census records showed several
people with the same surname lived at the same address, likely
relationships could be inferred from age and gender. Circumstantial
evidence is used in criminal courts to establish guilt or innocence through
reasoning. They also play an important role in civil courts to establish or
or deny liability
Analysis of the term Evidence
Evidence" is the raw material which a judge or adjudicator uses to reach
"findings of fact". The findings of fact that the evidence generates are -
for all their flaws - "what happened" for all intents and purposes of the
legal proceeding. If you do not agree with the fact-finding that has been
made (or even if you know it to be wrong), recognize that the rules of
evidence are the best rules that law know of to reach the necessary goal of
fact-finding
In its original sense the word evidence signifies, the state of being
evident i.e. plain, apparent or notorious. But. It is applied to that which
tends to render evidence or generate proof . The fact sought to be
proved is called the principal fact; the fact which tends to establish it, the
evidentiary fact
Analysis of the Term Circumstantial Evidence
Television show lawyers speak a lot about "circumstantial evidence".
"Circumstantial evidence" however is not so much a type of evidence as it
is a
logical principle of deduction. Deduction is reasoning from general
known principles to a specific proposition
Circumstantial evidence is unrelated facts that, when considered together,
can be used to infer a conclusion about something unknown. Information
and testimony presented by a party in a civil or criminal action that permit
conclusions that indirectly establish the existence or nonexistence of a fact
or event that the party seeks to prove.
An example of circumstantial evidence is the behavior of a person around
the time of an alleged offense. If someone were charged with theft of
money, and were then seen in a shopping spree purchasing expensive
items, the shopping spree might be regarded as circumstantial evidence of
the individual's guilt. Similarly if a witness arrives at a crime scene
seconds after hearing a gunshot to find someone standing over a corpse
and holding a smoking pistol, the evidence is circumstantial, since the
person may merely be a bystander who picked up the weapon after the
killer dropped it. The popular notion that one cannot be convicted on
circumstantial evidence is false. Most criminal convictions are based, at
least in part, on circumstantial evidence that sufficiently links criminal
and crime.
In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has stated in Holland v. United States .
that "circumstantial evidence is intrinsically no different from testimonial
[direct] evidence" Thus, the distinction between direct and circumstantial
evidence has little practical effect in the presentation or admissibility of
evidence in trials. Similarly in India the two leading case of Priyadarshani
Matoo and Jessica Lal were heavily based on circumstantial evidence.
Evidence as per English Law
According to Stephens the word evidence is used in three senses
1) words uttered, and thing exhibited in Court,
2) facts proved by those words or things , which are regarded as ground
word of inference as to other facts not so proved, and
3) relevancy of a particular fact to matter under inquiry
Evidence as per Indian law
Section 3 of Indian Evidence Act 1872 defines evidence which is more
definite meaning, viz, the first one. Evidence thus signifies only the
instruments by means of which relevant facts are brought before the Court
.Evidence is generally divided into three categories facts are brought
before the Court. Evidence is generally divided into three categories:
1) oral or personal
2) documentary and,
3) material or real.
The definition of evidence must be read together with that of proved.
The combine results of these two definition is that evidence under the
Indian Evidence Act which is not only the medium of proof but there are
in addition to this , number of other matter which the Courts has to take
into consideration, when forming its conclusion. Thus the definition of
evidence in the Indian evidence Act is incomplete and narrow.
In State Of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai, the Supreme Court has
held that under section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, besides oral and
documentary evidence, electronic record can also be admitted as
evidence. The Court further stated that evidence ruled in criminal matters
could be by way of electronic records, which would also include
videoconferencing ,Hence what is no evidence
a) a confession or the statement of one accessed under Section 342,CrP.C
b) demeanor of witness(section 361, Cr.P.C ,O18,R,12,C.P.C)
c)local investigation or inspection (O.26,R,9);(O18,R18,C.P.C;sections
293 , 539B,CrP.C )
d) Facts judicially noticeable without proof (Section 56 ,57 Act)
e) Material objects(Section60)
Further coming to the subject, English text writers has divide evidence
into
a) Direct evidence
b) Indirect and circumstantial evidence
Direct Evidence
In this sense direct evidence is the evidence is that which goes expressly
to the very point in question and proves it, if believed without aid from
inference or deductive reasoning, e.g., eye witness to a murder is direct
evidence
Circumstantial evidence
Circumstantial evidence is also known as indirect evidence.
Circumstantial evidence is usually a theory, supported by a significant
quantity of corroborating evidence. The distinction between direct and
circumstantial evidence is important because, with the obvious exceptions
(the immature, incompetent, or ), nearly all criminals are careful to not
generate direct evidence, and try to avoid demonstrating criminal intent.
Therefore, to prove the mens rea levels of "purposely" or "knowingly,"
the prosecution must usually resort to circumstantial evidence. The same
goes for tortfeasors in tort law, if one needs to prove a high level of mens
rea to obtain punitive damages.
Circumstantial Evidence: Soul Basis Of Conviction
Ordinarily circumstantial eidence cannot be regarded as direct
evidence,and with this regard , there have been a popular misconception is
that circumstantial evidence is less valid or less important than direct
evidence. This is only partly true: direct evidence is generally considered
more powerful, but successful criminal prosecutions often rely largely on
circumstantial evidence, and civil charges are frequently based on
circumstantial or indirect evidence. In practice, circumstantial evidence
often has an advantage over direct evidence in that it is more difficult to
suppress or fabricate.
Thus the judiciary in following landmark judgment has ruled the
important role played by circumstantial evidence which can later become
the sole bases of conviction. In Ramawati Devi vs. State of Biharwherein
it has been held as follows:-
What evidentiary value or weight has to be attached to such statement,
must necessarily depend on the facts and circumstances of each particular
case. In a proper case, it may be permissible to convict a person only on
the basis of a dying declaration in the light of the facts and circumstances
of the case........
As pointed out by Fazal Ali, J, in V.C. Shukla vs. State" in most cases it
will be difficult to get direct evidence of the agreement, but a conspiracy
can be inferred even from circumstances giving rise to a conclusive or
irresistible inference of an agreement between two or more persons to
commit an offence. As per Wadhwa, J. in Nalini's case
The well known rule governing circumstantial evidence is that each and
every incriminating circumstance must be clearly established by reliable
evidence and "the circumstances proved must form a chain of events from
which the only irresistible conclusion about the guilt of the accused can be
safely drawn and no other hypothesis against the guilt is possible.
Similarly in the famous case of Bodh Raj V. State of Jammu
&Kashmir, Court held that circumstantial evidence can be a sole basis for
conviction provided the conditions as stated below is fully
staisfied.Condition are:
1) The circumstances from which guilt is established must be fully
proved;
2) That all the facts must be consistent with the hypothesis of the guilt of
the accussed;
3) That the circumstances must be of a conclusive nature and tendency ;
a. That the circumstances should, to a moral certanity , actually exclude
every hypotheis expectthe one proposed to be proved.
Similary in Priyadharshani Matto case
'That I know the defendant is guilty, my hands are tied. As a judge, I can
only go by the evidence provided by the investigative agencies.' These
were the words of Additional Sessions Judge G P Thareja, who acquitted
Santosh Kumar Singh, Delhi University law student who committed rape
and murder of Priyadharshani Matto. But However the Delhi High court
said that the overall analysis of the circumstances proved beyond doubt
and the evidence is unimpeachable that Singh has committed rape and
murder. "We are of the view to convict him (Singh) under section 302
(murder) and 376 (rape) of the Indian Penal Code," the Bench said. The
Court observed that the trial court verdict was "perverse" and shocked the
judicial conscience. The court said the evidence was incompatible with
Singh's plea of innocence and "we held him guilty of the offence he
committed".
Likewise in long-awaited State v Sidhartha Vashisht and Others- Held,
this case is one that has shocked the confidence of the society in the
criminal delivery system. Wrapping up the appeal in 25 hearings, a Bench
comprising Justice R S Sodhi and Justice P K Bhasin, which had given
death sentence to Santosh Kumar Singh in the Priyadarshni Mattoo case,
also convicted Vikas Yadav, an accused in the Nitish Katara murder case,
and Amardeep Singh Gill alias Tony, an executive in a multinational firm,
for conspiracy and destruction of evidence.
"We have no hesitation in holding that Manu Sharma is guilty of an
offence under Section 302 (murder) of IPC for having committed the
murder of Jessica Lal ... As also under Section 27 of the Arms Act," the
Bench said allowing the appeal of the Delhi Police.
"In the totality of circumstances adduced from material on record, the
judgment under challenge appears to us to be an immature assessment
Conclusion
The whole discussion essentially brings us back to the fundamental
question of whether Circumstantial evidence is a sole base of conviction
or not. Undeniable the conclusion would be affirmative in true spirit
.Undoubtedly; circumstantial evidence plays a pivotal role in criminal
case. heavily based on circumstantial evidence. circumstantial evidence"
which helped prosecution nail in various landmark cases mentioned abov
was heavily based on circumstantial evidence.
A popular misconception is that circumstantial evidence is less valid or
less important than direct evidence. This is only partly true: direct
evidence is generally considered more powerful, but successful criminal
prosecutions often rely largely on circumstantial evidence, and civil
charges are frequently based on circumstantial or indirect evidence. In
practice, circumstantial evidence often has an advantage over direct
evidence in that it is more difficult to suppress or fabricate. Where the
case is not based entirely or substantially on circumstantial evidence, a
modified direction in respect of circumstantial evidence may be
appropriate when summing-up in respect of an element of the offence
which is based entirely or substantially on circumstantial evidence.
Reference
1) 2003(2)RCR (Criminal)SC771
2) 348 U.S. 121, 75 S. Ct. 127, 99 L. Ed. 150 [1954]
3) 1983) 1 SCC 211 (pp. 214-15, Para 71980 (2) SCC 665
4) 1999 (5) SCC 253], (supra) at page 516
5) AIR 2002 SC 316
6) 20/12/2006 (DELHI HIGH COURT)
7) Circumstantial Evidence: Death, Life, And Justice In A Southern Town
(Paperback) by Pete Earley
8) Indian Evidence Law By Justice Muneer

The author can be reached at: sudershani@legalserviceindia.com
Added Date: 20 Dec 2007
Lenght: 2146 words
Views: 2532
Avg Rating:






About the Author: Sudershani Ray

Student of Jamia Millia Islamia


Lawyers in India - Click on a link below for legal Services
lawyers in Mumbai
lawyers in Bangalore
lawyers in Pune
lawyers in Pondicherry
Mutual consent Divorce in
Delhi
Click Here
Ph no: 9650499965

Copyright Registration in India
Ph no: 9891244487

lawyers in Delhi - New Delhi
lawyers in Chandigarh
lawyers in Surat
lawyers in Nashik
lawyers in Jodhpur
lawyers in Jaipur
lawyers in Chennai
awyers in Janjgir
lawyers in Indore
lawyers in Allahabad
lawyers in Agra
lawyers in Ahmedabad
lawyers in Kolkata
lawyers in Hyderabad
lawyers in Rajkot
lawyers in Nagpur
lawyers in Cochin
lawyers in Lucknow
About Us | Copyright law | Legal Advice | Supreme Court Judgments | Divorce laws | Lawyers | Submit
article | Sitemap | Contact Us

legal Service India.com is Copyrighted under the Registrar of Copyright Act ( Govt of India) 2000-2013
ISBN No: 978-93-82417-01-9