Supreme Court recently adjudicated that it is not necessary for the prosecution in a case where there is circumstantial evidence present about the guilt of a police officer, there is no need for establishment of motive for the same.

While the presence of motive would be helpful the court was of the opinion that the lack of motive would not crumble the case of the prosecution in establishing guilt. The court was of the view that : “We would think that while it is true that if the prosecution establishes a motive for the accused to commit a crime it will undoubtedly strengthen the prosecution version based on circumstantial evidence, but that is far cry from saying that the absence of a motive for the commission of the crime by the accused will irrespective of other material available before the court by way of circumstantial evidence be fatal to the prosecution”

Click here to view judgement