The Supreme Court's landmark judgment in Chetan
v. The State of Karnataka established a critical principle regarding circumstantial evidence. The case involved murder allegations where the accused was the last person seen with the victim, and circumstantial evidence was the primary basis for conviction. The Supreme Court held that: Which of the following articulates the principle established in Chetan
v. State of Karnataka regarding circumstantial evidence?

In Chetan v. The State of Karnataka, the Supreme Court clarified that the standard for proving a fact (including through circumstantial evidence) under Section 2(j) of the BSA is when "based on reason and evidence, it appears so probable that a prudent person ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it exists." The judgment reiterated that all circumstances must form a complete chain pointing to guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and no single circumstantial fact alone suffices. This case applies the definition of "proved" under BSA Section 2(j) to circumstantial evidence analysis, establishing that courts must undertake systematic evaluation of the totality of circumstances.