The Supreme Court of India on recently reiterated that in cases where two views are possible while relying on circumstantial evidence, the view favouring the accused must be preferred.
Relying on judicial precedents, a Bench of Justices BR Gavai and Sanjay Karol observed,
“…in cases where heavy reliance is placed on circumstantial evidence, is that where two views are possible, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other towards his innocence, the one which is favourable to the accused must be adopted.”
The Court’s reiteration came in a plea challenging a judgment of the High Court which affirmed a Trial Court’s judgement, convicting Pradeep Kumar, the appellant, under sections Section 302/34 IPC and 201/34 IPC based on his extra judicial confessional statement made in the presence of certain prosecution witnesses.
Firstly, the Supreme Court noted that none of the courts below found that the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.