HARGUN SUNDER DAS GODEJA & ORS. vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

The Supreme Court held that under Article 136, it does not typically review evidence in criminal cases unless there is a significant procedural irregularity or violation of natural justice. The Court clarified that the non-appearance of an accused as a witness does not create a presumption of guilt against them. It emphasized that circumstantial evidence must be complete and trustworthy to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. In this case, despite irregularities in storage records, the evidence was sufficient to uphold the convictions under the Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act.