#Section 106 Evidence Act

The Supreme Court upheld a husband's murder conviction in a dowry death case, ruling that his fabricated defence of epileptic seizure - contradicted by post-mortem evidence of throttling - completed the circumstantial chain under Section 106 Evidence Act and triggered the Section 113-B presumption. The decision reinforces that a false plea on facts within the accused's exclusive knowledge can supply the missing link in dowry death prosecutions.

The Patna High Court acquitted the appellant in a 1995 dowry death murder conviction, ruling the prosecution failed to establish homicidal death beyond reasonable doubt and that the non-examination of the investigating officer caused substantial prejudice. The decision underscores the necessity of proving each element of the offence in circumstantial evidence cases and the procedural safeguard of examining the investigating officer.

Gauhati High Court affirms that conviction under Section 302 IPC can rest solely on a single eye-witness account, even if FIR and GD entries are procedurally flawed. The ruling underscores the primacy of direct evidence and shifts the burden to the accused under Section 106 of the Evidence Act to explain incriminating circumstances.

The Allahabad High Court acquitted a husband accused of murder, ruling that cohabitation and the 'last seen' theory do not automatically establish guilt under Section 302 IPC. The prosecution must first prove the accused's presence at the crime scene, and reliance on Section 106 of the Evidence Act without primary evidence is impermissible.

The Chhattisgarh High Court acquitted the appellant in a Section 304 IPC case after finding all prosecution witnesses hostile, no forensic link to the weapon, and no evidence establishing exclusive involvement. This reinforces that the benefit of doubt must be granted when the prosecution fails to meet its burden of proof through credible, corroborated evidence - a critical safeguard for accused persons in cases reliant on eyewitness testimony and forensic gaps.

Patna High Court reinforces that the 'last seen' doctrine cannot sustain a conviction unless the prosecution establishes a proven motive, documented identification, and an unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence. The ruling sets a stricter threshold for relying on this theory in criminal trials, impacting cases dependent on indirect proof.

Calcutta High Court upholds conviction under Section 302 IPC, ruling that the husband’s failure to explain his wife’s death at their home-despite no direct evidence-shifts the burden of proof under Section 106. The unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence sealed the conviction, reinforcing that silence in such cases can be fatal.

Chhattisgarh High Court upholds conviction under Section 302 IPC where the accused failed to explain the death of his wife inside their home, applying Section 106 of the Evidence Act. The ruling reinforces that in house murders, the burden shifts to the accused to provide a reasonable explanation when the prosecution establishes the couple was last seen together.

The Gujarat High Court overturned a life sentence, ruling that presence at a crime scene and uncorroborated police statements under Section 161 CrPC cannot substitute for proof beyond reasonable doubt. Conviction under Section 302 IPC requires a prima facie case before Section 106 of the Evidence Act can shift the burden - a threshold the prosecution failed to meet, reinforcing that circumstantial evidence must form an unbroken chain.

Allahabad HC upholds murder conviction based on circumstantial evidence, emphasizing the 'five golden principles' and Section 106 Evidence Act burden shift.

Allahabad High Court acquits accused in murder case where prosecution failed to establish unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence excluding reasonable doubt of innocence.

Kerala High Court upholds conviction under Section 302 IPC based on circumstantial evidence, last seen together theory, and subsequent conduct under Section 8, Evidence Act.

Bombay High Court upholds murder conviction under Section 302 IPC based on circumstantial evidence, emphasizing burden on accused to explain death occurring in his custody.

Bombay High Court acquits appellant in murder case, holding that circumstantial evidence must form an unbroken chain excluding all reasonable hypotheses of innocence.

Chhattisgarh High Court acquits accused under Section 302 IPC, holding that suicidal death cannot be converted into homicide without conclusive evidence of intent or presence.