Procedure to be followed by court if two views are possible on evidence adduced in criminal case

 We then pass on to another important point which seems to have been completely missed by the High Court. It is well settled that where on the evidence two possibilities are available or open, one which goes in favour of the prosecution and the other which benefits an accused, the accused is undoubtedly entitled to the benefit of doubt. In Kali Ram v. State of Himachal Pradesh MANU/SC/0121/1973 : 1974CriLJ1 , this Court made the following observations:

Another golden thread which runs through the web of the administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the view which is favourable to the accused should be adopted. This principle has a special relevance in cases wherein the guilt of the accused is sought to be established by circumstantial evidence.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 745 of 1983

Decided On: 17.07.1984

 Sharad Birdhichand Sarda Vs.  State of Maharashtra

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

A. Vardarajan, S. Murtaza Fazal Ali and Sabyasachi Mukherjee, JJ.

Read full judgment here: Click here

Citation:  (1984) 4 SCC 116(1) 

Print Page