The bench had said Guru established close contacts with

the deceased terrorists, more especially Mohammed. Short of participating in the actual attack, he did everything to set in motion the "diabolic mission". "As is the case with most of the conspiracies, there is and could be no direct evidence of the agreement amounting to criminal conspiracy. "However, the circumstances cumulatively considered and weighed, would unerringly point to the collaboration of the accused Afzal Guru with the slain 'Fidayeen' terrorists. "The circumstances, if considered together, as it ought to be, establish beyond reasonable doubt that Afzal Guru was a party to the conspiracy and had played an active part in various acts done in furtherance of the conspiracy," the bench had noted. These circumstances cannot be viewed in isolation and by no standards of common sense, be regarded as innocuous acts, it said. His conduct and actions, antecedent, contemporaneous and subsequent action, all point to his guilt and are only consistent with his involvement, it had noted. "Viewed from another angle, the court can draw a presumption under Section 114 of Evidence Act having regard to the natural course of events and human conduct that the appellant Afzal had nexus with the conspirators who were killed and all of them together hatched the conspiracy to attack the Parliament House and in that process to use explosives and other dangerous means. "We are, therefore, of the view that there is sufficient and satisfactory circumstantial evidence to establish that Afzal was a partner in this conspired crime of enormous gravity," it had said.