In Brief
A man was convicted of murdering his friend Vikram Shinde based on circumstantial evidence. The prosecution proved that the appellant was last seen with the deceased on the evening of the incident, that a double-barrel gun recovered at the appellant's instance was used in the crime (supported by ballistic evidence matching pellets found in the victim's skull), and that the appellant absconded and misled authorities. Though several witnesses turned hostile and motive was disputed, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction, holding that when forensic evidence establishes the weapon's linkage to the crime and the accused fails to explain incriminating circumstances, circumstantial evidence can sustain conviction. The Court set aside only the conviction for misappropriation of the mobile phone for want of proof.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.