that Shri Yashpal Kapur was actually asked by Smt. Gandhi to go to Rae Bareli to do anything for her election on this visit, but there is ample absolutely unshaken evidence of Shri Yashpal Kapur to the contrary, supported by the evidence of the Prime Minister herself which the learned trial Judge had, for some reason, entirely ignored. In any case it is utterly unthinkable that the Prime Minister herself could have conceivably authorised Shri Kapur to go to Munshiganj and make a public speech while he was till a Government servant, to support her candidature. And, if he had no authority from her either to act generally or to do any particular act on her behalf how could each and every action of Shri Kapur possibly make the Prime Minister legally liable vicariously for it? 422. The learned Judge, as is evident, from his summary of evidence and conclusions relied on circumstantial evidence only. But, in order that the circumstances should have a conclusive effect, so as to exclude any reasonable hypothesis except that of guilt, they had to point in one direction only and in no other. What is the position that emerges from a consideration of the circumstances found and detailed by the learned Judge himself? It was held that Shri Yashpal Kapur was occupying a position of trust and confidence with the original respondent for quite a long time. Indeed his evidence shows that he was so attached to the family of the original respondent and the political and national causes its members had represented that he was just the type of person who could, even without the slightest suggestion on the part of the original respondent, voluntarily taken upon himself the duty to do whatever he could do in his private capacity to help her return at the election. Indeed his private capacity as a person attached to the family of the original respondent and to the causes espoused by its members, could very well be considered more important by him than his Government service. And, this is exactly what the findings given by the learned Judge relating to services rendered by Shri Yashpal Kapur at the previous elections of the original respondent, showing how he had resigned his post on a previous occasion to help in her election, indicated. 423. In the passage from the judgment quoted above, the learned Judge draws an inference of a previous instruction, from the Prime Minister to Shri Kapur, to say what he is alleged to have said in a speech, because, inter alia. Shri Kapur met the Prime Minister on his return from Rae Bareli; Again, the necessary inference of a previous intimation by Shri Kapur to the Prime Minister of his intention to visit Rae Bareli, could not be that there was any authority or direction given by the Prime Minister to Shri Kapur to do or to say anything on her behalf All this would lie in the realm of pure conjecture and suspicion. It left other possible and more reasonable inferences wide open. 424. The learned Judge had himself held, so far as use of rostrums is concerned that the Prime Minister sheds her personality, as the holder of her office, and assumes the role of a mere candidate as soon as she ascends a platform to make an election speech. But, when the learned Judge deals with the action of Shri Kapur, in making a speech from a platform at a martyrs