Copyright © 2026 Authors retain the copyright of this article. This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

@article{195644,
        author = {ADV. ANU RAMCHANDRA NAIK and DR. AVANI MISTRY},
        title = {Circumstantial Evidence and Judicial Errors: A Critical Analysis of the Arushi Talwar Case},
        journal = {International Journal of Innovative Research in Technology},
        year = {2026},
        volume = {12},
        number = {11},
        pages = {566-567},
        issn = {2349-6002},
        url = {https://ijirt.org/article?manuscript=195644},
        abstract = {The Arushi Talwar Murder Case represents a landmark in Indian criminal jurisprudence, particularly in relation to the appreciation of circumstantial evidence. The case exposed serious deficiencies in criminal investigation and judicial reasoning, ultimately resulting in the acquittal of the accused by the Allahabad High Court. This paper critically evaluates the evidentiary framework governing circumstantial evidence under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, examines the judicial inconsistencies between trial and appellate courts, and highlights the urgent need for reform in investigative processes. The study argues that strict adherence to evidentiary principles is essential to uphold the integrity of the criminal justice system and prevent wrongful convictions.},
        keywords = {},
        month = {April},
        }