Thread by @manuvichar

Studying some provisions of Indian Evidence Act in the light of #BabriVerdict

"A is tried for a riot and is proved to have marched at the head of a mob. The cries of the mob are relevant as explanatory to the nature of the transaction" - illustration (f) of Section 9.

For example, if Advani & Co were heading the mob at Babri site, the cries of mob calling for demolition ("mandir waheen banaeenge" etc) are relevant facts to prove incitement.
#BabriDemolitionCase
#BabriMasjidDemolition

Criminal Conspiracy - Sec 10 says acts done by different members of conspiracy at different stages are relevant against each other in proving conspiracy, though the members may be strangers.
(In #BabriDemolitionCase, court said accused & kar sewaks are strangers to each other)

Going by the illustration of Section 10, the acts done by a member of alleged conspiracy are relevant against another person in proving the existence of conspiracy, even though they may be strangers.

#BabriDemolitionCase

Subsequent and previous conducts are relevant facts : Section 8.
#BabriAccusedAcquitted

For example, these(previous and subsequent conducts).

#BabriMasjidDemolitionCase

P.S : Court in #BabriDemolitionCase held that the newspaper reports, video tapes, photographs etc regarding speeches and slogans of the accused have not been proved to be authentic.