<p> “The circumstantial evidence is sufficient to hold a person guilty. It is not that circumstantial evidence is no evidence. People have been hanged on the basis of circumstantial evidence,” a Bench of Justices Markandey Katju and Gyan Sudha Mishra said.<br /><br />The court said in cases relating to poisoning incidents, the circumstantial evidence leads to convictions as there are no eyewitnesses to them.<br /><br />The Bench made these observations during over an hour-long hearing to dismiss an appeal filed by Surendra Koli, an accused in the infamous Nithari serial killings, against the capital punishment awarded to him. His counsel pointed that the CBI had relied upon only the circumstantial evidence against his client. The counsel, who submitted that there were discrepancies and contradictions in the statement of witnesses in the case, was rebuffed immediately by the Bench. “Small contradictions here and there will not help you. This is not the case where comma and full stop (in witnesses’ versions) can get you acquittal,” Justice Katju said.<br /><br />Koli’s counsel sought the court to reverse his conviction and set aside his sentence saying the chain of circumstance was not complete against him.<br /><br />The court also asked the counsel to look into the confessional statement of the convict giving graphic details of the killings, recovery of body parts and DNA matching the victims to conclude that the convict deserved no leniency.<br /><br /></p>
<p> “The circumstantial evidence is sufficient to hold a person guilty. It is not that circumstantial evidence is no evidence. People have been hanged on the basis of circumstantial evidence,” a Bench of Justices Markandey Katju and Gyan Sudha Mishra said.<br /><br />The court said in cases relating to poisoning incidents, the circumstantial evidence leads to convictions as there are no eyewitnesses to them.<br /><br />The Bench made these observations during over an hour-long hearing to dismiss an appeal filed by Surendra Koli, an accused in the infamous Nithari serial killings, against the capital punishment awarded to him. His counsel pointed that the CBI had relied upon only the circumstantial evidence against his client. The counsel, who submitted that there were discrepancies and contradictions in the statement of witnesses in the case, was rebuffed immediately by the Bench. “Small contradictions here and there will not help you. This is not the case where comma and full stop (in witnesses’ versions) can get you acquittal,” Justice Katju said.<br /><br />Koli’s counsel sought the court to reverse his conviction and set aside his sentence saying the chain of circumstance was not complete against him.<br /><br />The court also asked the counsel to look into the confessional statement of the convict giving graphic details of the killings, recovery of body parts and DNA matching the victims to conclude that the convict deserved no leniency.<br /><br /></p>
