#Section 201 IPC

The Supreme Court reiterated that circumstantial evidence in murder cases must form a complete, unbroken chain pointing conclusively to guilt. While acquitting the accused under Section 302 IPC due to evidentiary gaps, the Court upheld their conviction under Section 201 IPC for destroying evidence, setting a critical precedent for criminal trials relying on indirect proof.

Bombay High Court acquits the appellant of murder charges under Section 302 IPC due to gaps in circumstantial evidence but sustains conviction under Section 201 IPC for destroying evidence. The ruling underscores that while murder requires stringent proof beyond reasonable doubt, destruction of evidence can be established with a lower evidentiary standard, impacting criminal trial strategies.

Bombay High Court affirms that the 'last seen' theory, combined with DNA evidence, recovery of victim’s belongings, and medical testimony, constitutes a complete chain of circumstantial evidence sufficient for conviction under Section 302 IPC. The ruling underscores that concurrent sentences for Sections 302 and 201 IPC are permissible when the offences are interlinked.

Allahabad HC grants bail in a murder case where the prosecution failed to establish eyewitnesses, delayed FIR by over four months, and postmortem could not ascertain the cause of death. The ruling reinforces that bail cannot be denied merely on suspicion, especially when forensic evidence remains inconclusive and custodial interrogation is unnecessary.

Rajasthan High Court reinforces that a conviction under Section 302 IPC can rest solely on circumstantial evidence if the chain is unbroken and consistent. The court upheld the murder conviction based on the accused being last seen with the victim, recovery of body parts, and an unchallenged extra-judicial confession, setting a precedent for similar cases.

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that mere presence in an unlawful assembly, when coupled with carrying a firearm and actively threatening bystanders to prevent rescue, amounts to constructive participation under Section 149 IPC - even without physical assault. This clarifies the scope of vicarious liability and strengthens accountability for enablers of mob violence, impacting how prosecutors build cases against bystanders in communal or land-related riots.

The Chhattisgarh High Court overturned a murder conviction where the sole incriminating statement was an uncorroborated extra-judicial confession and the recovery of evidence was unreasonably delayed. This reinforces that no conviction under Section 302 IPC can rest on custodial statements without independent corroboration, safeguarding against coerced confessions in tribal and rural investigations.