Dilip Singh Moti Singh vs State Of Gujarat

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction under Sections 302 and 201 IPC, emphasizing that circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain without missing links to establish guilt. The Court reiterated that if two inferences are possible, the one favoring the accused must be accepted, as established in Pawan Kumar v. State of Haryana and State of U.P. v. Ashok Kumar Srivastava. The judgment highlighted the necessity for the prosecution to provide evidence that is incompatible with the innocence of the accused, leading to the conclusion that the conviction was justified based on the circumstantial evidence presented.