Jay Prakash Yadav v. State of Jharkhand 2026 INSC 317 - Criminal Trial - Circumstantial Evidence - Murder Case - Acquittal

Criminal Trial - Circumstantial Evidence - Every link in the chain of circumstantial evidence must be conclusively established. Even a single missing or weak link may prove fatal to the prosecution’s case. The chain must be so complete as to point unerringly to the guilt of the accused, and to no one else. Where, on the same set of evidence, two views are reasonably possible, the benefit of doubt must necessarily be extended to the accused. (Para 10) [Context: The Supreme Court set aside the conviction of constable Jay Prakash Yadav for the murder of his superior S.I. Sunil Soren, which had been based solely on circumstantial evidence. The Court held that the key prosecution witness (PW‑3) was only a post‑occurrence witness whose identification of the accused was unreliable, and that other circumstances—particularly about the rifle and duty registers—created only suspicion and not a complete chain of proof. Giving the benefit of doubt, the Court acquitted the appellant after nearly 12 years in custody and allowed him to seek reinstatement or adequate financial compensation, subject to his fitness.]