Scribd
Upload
280 views2 pages

Understanding Circumstantial Evidence

Circumstantial evidence is indirect evidence that requires the fact-finder to infer guilt from facts presented. It is evidence based on circumstances rather than direct observation. For circumstantial evidence to solely prove guilt, the circumstances presented must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and exclude any other reasonable conclusion except guilt. The example given is of a man, C, seen leaving his neighbor B's room holding a bloody knife after an argument, with B found dead - this would be circumstantial evidence used to infer C murdered B. The Jessica Lal murder case is cited as one where the court relied on circumstantial evidence to overturn an acquittal due to hostile witnesses, as circumstances strongly suggested Manu Sharma's guilt in shooting Jessica Lal.

Uploaded by

Adan Hooda
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
280 views2 pages

Understanding Circumstantial Evidence

Circumstantial evidence is indirect evidence that requires the fact-finder to infer guilt from facts presented. It is evidence based on circumstances rather than direct observation. For circumstantial evidence to solely prove guilt, the circumstances presented must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and exclude any other reasonable conclusion except guilt. The example given is of a man, C, seen leaving his neighbor B's room holding a bloody knife after an argument, with B found dead - this would be circumstantial evidence used to infer C murdered B. The Jessica Lal murder case is cited as one where the court relied on circumstantial evidence to overturn an acquittal due to hostile witnesses, as circumstances strongly suggested Manu Sharma's guilt in shooting Jessica Lal.

Uploaded by

Adan Hooda
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

What do you mean by Circumstantial Evidence?

Peter Murphy defines it as “evidence from which the desired conclusion may be drawn but
which requires the tribunal of fact not only to accept the evidence presented but also draw an
inference from it.”[3] Circumstantial Evidence is also known as indirect evidence. There’s
always a myth lying behind circumstantial evidence that it’s evident enough to prove someone
guilty of his act as the evidence is based upon the circumstances rather than direct evidence
which has the upper hand in this. However, when there is an absence of direct evidence the case
solely depends on the circumstantial evidence. Now, it’s the work of the jury to critically analyze
the validity of circumstantial evidence as it’s a string connecting the facts to recreate the crime
scene in a court room. Circumstantial Evidence is used both in civil and criminal matters but
mostly in criminal matters.

For example,  A, B and C are three friends living in the same apartment. One day, A hears some
noise coming from B’s room when he recognizes that B is not alone in the room C is also there,
and some argument is going on between them. After a few minutes, A hears the voice of B
shouting for help, as soon as he runs towards the door of B’s room, C comes out of the room
with a knife in his hand covered with blood and B  lying dead on the floor.

Here  A has not seen C killing B in front of his eyes but has found C holding the murder weapon
and coming out of the room. Therefore, the testimony of A becomes circumstantial evidence
from which it can be inferred that C murdered B. The panel of judges must determine whether
A’s statement is credible or not.

On the second aspect – If A has seen C killing B right in front of his eyes then his testimony
would have become direct evidence for the jury to penalize the criminal.

Essentials of Circumstantial Evidence

Evidence plays a vital role in delivering justice to the innocent. However, one should take care of
any evidence which is going to be produced before the court. As it must fulfill the essential
elements of being admissible in court. A case can be solely adjudged by circumstantial evidence
if the following essentials are fulfilled[4] –

 The circumstance from which the guilt is established should be proven;


 That each one the facts should be according to the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused;
 That the circumstances should be conclusive in nature and tendency;
 That the circumstances ought to, to an ethical certainty, truly exclude each hypothesis
except the one projected to be evidenced.
 The evidence should prove the guilt of the culprit beyond a reasonable doubt.

Similarly in the case of Bodh Raj vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir[5] –
 The circumstances from where conclusion of guilt is to be drawn ought to be established.
The circumstances involved ‘must’ or ‘should’ and not ‘may be’ established.
 The facts, therefore, established ought to be as per the hypothesis of the guilt of the
accused.
 Circumstances ought to be conclusive in nature and tendency.
 They ought to exclude each attainable hypothesis except the one to be tested.
 There should be a complete sequence of proof so as to not leave any affordable ground
for the conclusion in line with the innocence of the defendant and should show that the
act must have been done by the defendant.

Application of Circumstantial Evidence the case of Jessica Lal


The Jessica Lal murder case is one of the most cited, debated and controversial cases where the
Apex Court’s decision was based on the circumstantial evidence as the witnesses had turned
hostile. Initially, the trial court had acquitted the accused on the ground of hostile witnesses and
lack of strong evidence. Delhi High Court reversed the judgment and held Manu Sharma (the
accused) guilty of murdering Jessica Lal, who was a bartender at a restaurant in Qutub
Colonnade in the capital city, and was shot by Sidhartha Vashisht alias Manu Sharma, the son of
a senior Congress Party politician and former Union minister, when she refused to give him
liquor as the bar was closed.[6]

You might also like