एतेषां कारणानामनभिसंधाने विप्रलपन्तमचोरं विद्यात् ॥ कZ_०४.८.११ ॥
eteṣāṃ kāraṇānām anabhisaṃdhāne vipralapantam acoraṃ vidyāt
Si, en l’absence de ces causes (incriminantes), une personne parle de façon incohérente ou contradictoire, il faut la comprendre comme non-voleur (c’est-à-dire non coupable de vol).
Guilt should not be inferred merely from confused speech when concrete causal grounds for suspicion are absent; the state must avoid treating anxiety or incoherence as proof.
It anticipates a ‘proof over demeanor’ approach: behavioral cues alone are insufficient without corroborating facts.