STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Vs. SHYAM BEHARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to the order of acquittal recorded by a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court. The respondents faced trial for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Sections 34 and 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short IPC). Learned IVth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kanpur found the respondents guilty and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and two years rigorous imprisonment respectively for the aforesaid two offences. In appeal, the High Court reversed the judgment of conviction and directed acquittal.

(2.) In Suppl ort of the appeal learned counsel for the appellant/State submitted that the circumstances which were highlighted by the trial Court to record conviction have been without any basis reversed by the High Court. Learned counsel for the respondent Suppl orted the judgment of acquittal.

(3.) The prosecution version rested on circumstantial evidence. The law regarding circumstantial evidence is well settled. When a case rests upon the circumstantial evidence, such evidence must satisfy three tests : (1) the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn must be cogently and firmly established : (2) those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards guilt of the accused; (3) the circumstances, taken cumulatively, should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probabilities the crime was committed by the accused and none else.