INTRODUCTION
The law of evidence places a lot of emphasis on circumstantial evidence, but other phrases do
crop up occasionally. It is beneficial to review the fundamentals of proof so that you have a
basic idea of what direct evidence and circumstantial evidence are. As it will demonstrate,
historically, there were some rather major variations in how the law would treat this kind of
evidence. Today, such distinctions are largely no longer relevant, but since these terms are
still used so frequently, it's a good idea to grasp what they imply and the ramifications of
using them.
WHAT IS EVIDENCE?
The definition of "evidence" in Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act 1 is more of a list of what
constitutes "evidence" than a definition of the term itself. The word "evidence" is derived
from the Latin word "evident," which means "obvious," or "to find out, to establish,"
according to everyday law.2 According to the Indian Evidence Act of 18723, "evidence" refers
to “all statements that witnesses are permitted or required to make in front of the court
regarding any fact that is being investigated.” These statements are collectively referred to as
"oral evidence." All papers, including electronic records, that are produced before a court
examination are covered in the definition's second section. These are distinct from oral
testimony, and all of these types of records are referred to as documentary evidence.
Anything that proves or refutes the veracity of an alleged truth is considered evidence.
Evidence is anything that convinces the court of the object in question (except a simple
argument).4
KINDS OF EVIDENCE
ORAL EVIDENCE- According to Section 595, all facts aside from those that contain paper or
electronic evidence are taken into account as oral evidence; nevertheless, the oral evidence
must be the direct one. The question of what constitutes true direct proof now emerges.
1
“Section 3 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872,” available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1031309/ (last
visited June 20, 2023).
2
Diganth Raj Sehgal, “All About Circumstantial Evidence” iPleaders, 2020available at:
https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-about-circumstantial-evidence/ (last visited June 20, 2023).
3
“iea 1872. pdf,”.
4
“Circumstantial Evidence in India,”available at: https://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l136-
Circumstantial-Evidence.html (last visited June 20, 2023).
5
“Section 59 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872,”available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1385485/ (last
visited June 20, 2023).
DIRECT EVIDENCE- If believed without the help of inference or deductive thinking, direct
evidence, such as an eyewitness to a murder, is that which directly addresses the issue at hand
and establishes it.
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
Indirect evidence is another name for circumstantial evidence. A notion with a large body of
supporting evidence is typically considered circumstantial evidence. With the obvious
exceptions (the young, inept, or), nearly all criminals take care not to produce direct evidence
and attempt to avoid proving illegal intent. 6 This makes the distinction between direct and
circumstantial evidence crucial.
RISK OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
When presenting circumstantial evidence, one should not draw too hasty of a judgement;
instead, one should consider all of the possible outcomes. The conclusion one wants to draw
is more likely supported by other circumstantial evidence, since the more circumstantial
evidence one can assemble, the more strongly a thesis can be supported. 7 For example, by
demonstrating that the road is wet, which is one piece of circumstantial evidence, the fact that
it was cloudy and people were carrying umbrellas, which is another piece of circumstantial
evidence, and the fact that it usually rains at that time of year are all circumstantial evidence
that the rain was falling on that day even though no one could see it. The accumulation of
circumstantial evidence can be a potent instrument in the evidentiary reasoning process.
SCOPE OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE
If the aforementioned requirements are met, a person might be found guilty only based on
circumstantial evidence in the absence of any direct proof (Umedbhai v. State of Gujarat8).
When evaluating a case based on circumstantial evidence, one event may not always
conclusively show that the accused is guilty. According to Gade Lakshmi Mangraju v.
State of AP9, the outcome of all the factors taken together could be significant.
As a result, “the chain of evidence must be such that there is no rational basis left for a
conclusion that is relevant to the accused's innocence and it must be such that it demonstrates
6
“Circumstantial Evidence in India,”available at: https://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l136-
Circumstantial-Evidence.html (last visited June 20, 2023).
7
Diganth Raj Sehgal, “All About Circumstantial Evidence” iPleaders, 2020available at:
https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-about-circumstantial-evidence/ (last visited June 20, 2023).
8
AIR 1978 SC 424
9
AIR 2001 SC 2677
that the accused must have committed the act given the circumstances (Hanumant Govind
Nargundkar v. State of M.P.”10
CONCLUSION
The idea that circumstantial evidence is less reliable or less significant than direct evidence is
a common one. This is only partially accurate; while circumstantial or indirect evidence is
regularly used in civil lawsuits, successful criminal trials frequently rely heavily on direct
evidence. Direct evidence is also generally seen as being more compelling. Since it is more
difficult to suppress or produce, indirect evidence frequently has an advantage over direct
evidence in real-world situations. In actuality, the court feels certain in convicting an accused
party if there is direct evidence as well as circumstantial evidence, such as proof of purpose,
action, and opportunity. But even if the court accepts the evidence, if it turns out to be all
circumstantial, it will still carefully examine the evidence to rule out any favourable theories
about the accused before convicting him.
10
AIR 1952 SC 343
