Beyond Mere Prescence: Critical Analysis on Doctrine of Last Seen

Author: Shum Ritha K, SASTRA School of Law


To The Point
The doctrine of last seen is an important principle, exclusively in cases reliant on circumstantial evidence. It allows court to infer guilt if the accused was last seen with the deceased and fails to provide credible explanation for the victim’s subsequent disappearance or death. The doctrine itself is not conclusive but must be corroborated by additional evidence such as motive, forensic evidences, witness testimony and etc. The time in between the last sight and the crime is very important, a huge gap weakens the inferential value of the doctrine. The burden of proof primarily lies with the prosecution and shifting it to the accused is just an exception of the rule.


Abstract
The doctrine of “Last Seen” is a pivotal principle in criminal jurisprudence. This article critically analyses the doctrine’s statutory framework, judicial value, evidentiary need and relevant limitations. It also highlights the legal burden of proof, the necessity for corroborative evidence, and the doctrine’s implication in safeguarding the concept of presumption of innocence. Through an detailed study of landmark case laws and comparative jurisprudence, this article envisages the need for legal caution and to prevent misuse of justice system in the application of the last seen doctrine.


The Doctrine of Last Seen
This doctrine relies on the principle of probability, cause and connection to an event. This doctrine originates from English Common Law, where if a person was last seen in the company of the victim and no credible explanation is provided then they held it was sufficient to hold the person guilty as because a strong presumption arises. Accordingly, in occurrence of an event then other events also takes place which are the probable consequences of a major event or is related to it either retrospectively or prospectively.
This doctrine is also strongly embedded in the Indian Jurisprudence through the Indian Evidence Act. This theory derives its relevance from Section 7 of the Indian Evidence Act (Sec.5 of BSA) which is called the “Doctrine of Inductive Logic” which deals with facts which are the occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue. This provision recognizes facts connected to the cause or effect of relevant events, making the accused’s presence with the victim a relevant fact. Then Section. 106 of Indian Evidence Act (Sec. 109 of BSA) places the burden of proof on the accused for facts within their exclusive knowledge, and Section 114 (Sec.119 of BSA) allows courts to presume certain facts based on natural human conduct and the sequence of events. However, the doctrine of last seen is not conclusive evidence on its own; it is considered a weak form of proof and must be corroborated by other evidence such as motive, forensic findings, or credible witness testimony to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.


Key Features
The following are the key features of the Doctrine of Last Seen. It is important to consider all the following factors regarding the doctrine. The features are as follows:
Temporal Proximity- The accused was seen with the victim just before the crime happened. If the time between being last seen together and the crime is very short, it’s more likely the accused was involved.
Exclusive Opportunity- Only the accused had the chance to commit the crime because no one else was with the victim at that time. If nobody else was around, it’s easier to believe the accused did it.
Presumption of Involvement- The law assumes the accused might be involved if they were last seen with the victim.
Judiciary Caution- Courts are careful and do not convict someone just because they were last seen with the victim. This protects innocent people from being wrongly punished.
Shifting of Burden- Sometimes, the accused has to explain what happened after they were last seen with the victim. The main job of proving guilt is still with the police and prosecution, but the accused might need to give their side.
Corroborative Evidence- Other evidence such  as forensic findings, eye witness is required to support the idea that the accused is to be held guilty. Being last seen together is not enough—there must be more proof, like motive or forensic evidence.
Legal Precedents and Standards- Past court decisions and rules guide how the last seen doctrine is used. This helps make sure the law is applied fairly and consistently.


Judicial Interpretation
Shailendra Rajdev Pasvan V. State of Gujarat(2019) – In this case the Supreme Court held that all the circumstances when taken into consideration it didn’t highlight the guilt of the accused as there were discrepancies in the testimony of the witnesses. And there is also a huge gap between the accused and the deceased seen together and identification of the body, hence considering the time duration, the guilt of the accused was weakened and also there was no witness to corroborate the statements that were allegedly made in the confession.
Surajdeo Mahto V. State of Bihar(2021)- In this case the accused failed to explain the whereabouts of the deceased and also ran away after the murder. The prior existence of motive with the accused was also proved by the prosecution through proper relevant evidences. Thus the accused was convicted.
Kanhaiya Lal v. State of Rajasthan (2014)- The Court ruled that the last seen theory alone is insufficient for conviction. Corroborative evidence such as motive, forensic findings, and witness testimony is essential to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.


Conclusion
The doctrine of last seen is a two-edged knife in criminal jurisprudence. While it bridges evidentiary gaps in cases lacking direct evidence, its application must be tempered with caution, corroboration, and respect for the presumption of innocence. Judicial precedents consistently affirm that the doctrine, though valuable, is a weak form of evidence and cannot alone justify conviction unless unerringly determinative and ruling out all other possibilities. As forensic science advances and legal standards evolve, the doctrine must be applied judiciously, ensuring that justice is served without compromising the right of the accused.


Frequently Asked Questions(FAQs)
What is doctrine of last seen?
The doctrine of last seen is a principle based on circumstantial evidence that enables courts to interpret guilt if the accused was last seen with the victim and fails to provide a credible explanation for the victim’s subsequent disappearance or death.
Can a conviction be based solely on the last seen doctrine?
No, the courts have consistently held that the last seen doctrine alone is insufficient for conviction. There must be corroborative evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Is the doctrine itself is conclusive proof of guilt?
No, the doctrine is not conclusive proof. It is a rebuttable presumption and must be corroborated by additional evidence such as motive, forensic findings, credible witness testimony and etc.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *