Pune police are racing to build an airtight case against Siya Goyal, the prime accused in the murder of businessman Ketan Agarwal, whose body was found at Lohagad, near Pune, amid growing legal scrutiny over whether circumstantial evidence alone will be enough to secure a conviction.
Goyal is accused of pushing Agarwal off Lohagad fort and causing his death, allegedly with the help of her boyfriend, Chetan Chaudhary.
Police say the two had confessed to the crime during interrogation. However, under Indian law, confessions made before police are not admissible as evidence in court, meaning investigators must rely entirely on circumstantial evidence to prove the case.
'A Single Link' Could Decide The Case
A legal expert explained the stakes to NDTV Marathi, "If police are to prove Siya and Chetan guilty of the murder, they will need solid evidence. There is no eyewitness in this case, so it will have to proceed on circumstantial evidence. But if even a single link in that chain doesn't hold up, it will work directly in Siya and Chetan's favour, they could walk free and be acquitted."
How Police Say The Murder Was Planned
According to police, Goyal allegedly plotted the murder with Chaudhary's assistance, holding planning meetings at a café and conducting a reconnaissance of the Lohagad site beforehand.
With no eyewitnesses to the killing, the case hinges on police piecing together mobile records, CCTV footage, location data and forensic reports into an unbroken chain of evidence.
The Legal Precedent At Play
The case drew a parallel with the landmark 1984 Supreme Court verdict in Sharad Birdichand Sarda vs State of Maharashtra, which laid down the "panchsheel", or five key principles, governing convictions based on circumstantial evidence in cases without eyewitnesses.
The five principles require that,
1. The circumstances alleged must be fully established;
2. These facts must be consistent only with the accused's guilt, ruling out any other explanation;
3. They must be conclusive in nature;
4. They must exclude every other possible hypothesis except guilt; and
5. The chain of evidence must be so complete as to leave no reasonable doubt of innocence, pointing to guilt with near-certainty.
ALSO READ: Pune Bizman Murder: From Siya Goyal's Arrest To Shocking Revelations — 10 Key Takeaways
Lessons From The Aarushi Talwar Case
The Aarushi Talwar murder case can be seen as a cautionary precedent, in which despite extensive circumstantial evidence, the Allahabad High Court had acquitted the accused after finding the prosecution's chain of evidence incomplete.
Defence lawyers in that case had also raised doubts by suggesting a third party may have been responsible, though the prosecution did not pursue that line, a gap that ultimately benefited the accused, who were later acquitted after initially being convicted by a lower court.
ALSO READ: Pune Bizman Murder: Siya Goyal Wanted To Leave 'Boyfriend' Chetan? Brother Makes Big Claim
Onus On Pune Police
Hence, the outcome of the Lohagad case will depend heavily on how meticulously Pune police are able to establish the sequence of events implicating Goyal and Chaudhary, with any procedural or evidentiary lapses likely to be exploited by the defence.
Essential Business Intelligence, Sharp Market Insights, Practical Personal Finance Advice, Daily Fuel, Gold and Silver Prices and Latest Stories — On NDTV Profit.