Clinching Evidence is Must for Conviction
Mens rea (intention) and actus rues (action) are the two constituents of any crime as opposed to the mental state of the accused. The Supreme Court has, however, made it abundantly clear in some of the decisions that if the clinching circumstantial evidences are available to establish the intention of the accused to have committed the crime, the accused can be punished. This has been emphatically stated in the recent case of ‘ Sukhpal Singh vs State of Punjab ’. The case, in brief, is that upon discovery of an unidentified body near a canal bank, the case was registered and upon investigation the petitioner along with another came to be charged with the offence of murder. The trial Court convicted the petitioner but acquitted the co-accused. The High Court has affirmed the conviction. In the Supreme Court, the petitioner contended that there was absolutely no motive for him to commit the murder. Needless to say, in a case of circumstantial evidence, m...