YASER ARAFATH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prosecution story runs thus:

(2.) Heard Mr. V. Karthic, learned Senior Counsel representing Mr.N.Saravanan, learned counsel on record for the appellant and Mr. K. Prabakar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

(3.) The prosecution story rests on circumstantial evidence. Mr. V.Karthic placed reliance on the following passage from the celebrated judgment of the Supreme Court in Hanumant vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1952 SC 343 and submitted that the evidence in this case should be tested on the anvil of the law propounded in the said ruling: