Circumstantial Evidence Must Form a Complete Chain, Not Rest on Doubtful Recoveries: Supreme Court

Case Name: The State of Himachal Pradesh v. Varindar Verma @ Jatti & ANR.
Appeal No.: Criminal Appeal No(s). 67/2018
Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 1028
Date of Judgment: 17.09.2026
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Manoj Misra, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vijay Bishnoi
Relevant Statutes and Provisions: Section 302, Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

(The Hon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the Criminal Appeal filed by the State of Himachal Pradesh, upholding the acquittal of the accused, holding that recovery of weapons and blood-stained clothes, unsupported by trustworthy witness testimony, cannot complete the chain of circumstances required for conviction on circumstantial evidence.)

The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the testimony, though central to the prosecution’s case, could not be relied upon, as it failed to disclose the incriminating circumstance to the informant despite reaching the spot within two hours of the occurrence and being aware of the enmity between the parties. But the recoveries of the blood-stained clothes and Dandas, effected three days after arrest through interested witnesses, and the absence of DNA profiling to conclusively match the blood group could be taken as reasons or justifications for not disturbing the High Court’s finding of acquittal.

FACTS

The State of Himachal Pradesh appealed against the judgment of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla dated 06.04.2015, which acquitted Varinder Verma and Dev Raj. The Court of Session had earlier convicted them under Sections 302/34 IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonment for the deaths of Om Prakash and Ganga Ram on 06.06.2009. PW-1 (Kuldeep Verma, the informant and son of Om Prakash) lodged an FIR against unknown persons at 04:45 hours on 07.06.2009. It stated that the bodies were found by the roadside near Gadah Kufri at about 10:30 pm, with blood-stained wooden pieces lying nearby. The FIR named no accused and expressed no suspicion against anyone.

The prosecution’s case rested on circumstantial evidence. PW-2 (a witness present where the deceased were consuming liquor) stated that the accused had noticed the deceased there. The accused, carrying Dandas, then allegedly asked PW-3 (nephew of the deceased) where the deceased had gone, and the bodies were found shortly afterwards. After PW-3’s statement was recorded on 07.06.2009, the accused were arrested. On 10.06.2009, at their instance, blood-stained clothes matching the deceased’s blood group and the Dandas were recovered. The Trial Court also treated enmity as a motive, since Ganga Ram had been turned out of the house of Varinder Verma’s father and was staying with Om Prakash.

The High Court noted that both deceased had consumed a large quantity of alcohol, so a fall or a brawl could not be ruled out. It found the recovery of the Dandas from the pond unreliable. Wood normally floats, and PW-8 (the recovery witness) had a motive to implicate the accused because Varinder Verma’s father had filed a case against PW-8’s son. On the clothes, the accused’s blood samples were not taken, and there was no DNA profiling, so the matching blood group was not conclusive. With no eyewitness to the night-time murder, the High Court gave the accused the benefit of doubt.

ISSUES

1. Whether the prosecution had established a complete and reliable chain of circumstantial evidence, including the testimony of PW-3 and the recoveries of the blood-stained clothes and dandas, sufficient to exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence and thereby justify interference with the acquittal of the accused?

CONTENTION OF THE PETITIONER

• The learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the evidence adduced by the prosecution, when appreciated in its entirety and cumulatively, established an unbroken chain of incriminating circumstances pointing towards the guilt of the accused. 
• It was submitted that PW-2 had seen the accused in the vicinity of the two deceased while they were consuming liquor and that, thereafter, the accused returned armed with dandas and enquired from PW-3 as to the direction in which the deceased had proceeded. 
• Shortly thereafter, the deceased were found dead, having sustained injuries attributable to a hard and blunt object, consistent with the use of a wooden danda. The recovery of the dandas and the blood-stained clothes of the accused, coupled with the existence of a motive, were urged as further corroborative circumstances connecting the accused with the commission of the offence. 
• It was, therefore, submitted that the cumulative effect of the aforesaid circumstances formed a complete chain, consistent only with the guilt of the accused and incompatible with any reasonable hypothesis of their innocence, thereby establishing that the accused, and none other, were responsible for the commission of the crime.

CONTENTION OF THE RESPONDENTS

• It has been submitted that the view taken by the High Court in extending the benefit of doubt to the accused does not call for interference, as the evidence adduced by the prosecution is tenuous and insufficient to establish a complete chain of circumstances. 
• It was contended that the material on record does not conclusively exclude a reasonable hypothesis consistent with the innocence of the accused and, consequently, the acquittal recorded by the High Court warrants no interference.

JUDGMENT AND ANALYSIS

• The Court reiterated that, in cases founded on circumstantial evidence, every incriminating circumstance must be proved beyond reasonable doubt and must be consistent only with the guilt of the accused. The circumstances, taken cumulatively, must form a complete chain excluding every reasonable hypothesis consistent with innocence. 
• On the facts, the occurrence took place at night near a public road, without any eyewitness to the murder. As both deceased were found to have consumed liquor, the possibility of a brawl could not be completely excluded. PW-2’s evidence was also found doubtful in view of the darkness and the absence of any specific assertion that the accused were carrying dandas. 
• The testimony of PW-3 was treated with caution, as he was the nephew of the deceased and allegedly reached the spot within about two hours of the occurrence. Despite being aware of the alleged enmity, he did not disclose to PW-1 that the accused had been armed and had enquired about the deceased. 
• Relying upon Kali Ram v. State of H.P., (1973) 2 SCC 808, the Court held that unexplained silence regarding a serious incriminating circumstance materially affects the evidentiary value of such testimony. The fact that the FIR was initially registered against unknown persons further weakened the prosecution version. 
• The recoveries of the blood-stained clothes and dandas, made three days after the arrest, were also found doubtful. The recovery witnesses were considered interested, and the other seizure witnesses were not examined. 
• The blood-group correspondence on the clothes was held inconclusive in the absence of the accused’s blood samples or DNA profiling. Consequently, after finding PW-3’s testimony unreliable and the recoveries doubtful, the Court held that the remaining evidence was insufficient to displace the High Court’s finding of acquittal.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by the State of Himachal Pradesh and upheld the acquittal of respondents Varinder Verma and Dev Raj. It held that the testimony of PW-3 was untrustworthy, and the recoveries of the Dandas and blood-stained clothes appeared stage-managed and artificial.