'Last Seen Theory' Alone Cannot Sustain Conviction: Supreme Court Acquits Man In Murder Case

Supreme Court, in a significant ruling, held that a conviction for murder cannot be sustained solely on the basis of the 'last seen theory' in the absence of any other corroborating incriminating evidence.

A bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran observed that the "testimony of the witnesses to prove the last seen theory does not inspire confidence," thereby setting aside the conviction of the appellant.

The case originated from the discovery of a homicidal death near a temple, where the deceased was found with multiple bleeding wounds. While the trial court and the High Court had relied on the testimonies of witnesses who claimed to have seen the accused with the deceased shortly before the incident, the appellant—the son-in-law of the primary witness—approached the Supreme Court seeking an acquittal after initially being released on remission.

The primary question before the court was whether the 'last seen theory' as presented by the prosecution witnesses was sufficient to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond a reasonable doubt. The court was also called upon to determine if the credibility of the testimonies provided by witnesses who were declared hostile before being examined could form the basis of a conviction.

Last Seen Theory Insufficient For Conviction

The court meticulously examined the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, noting that several witnesses were initially declared hostile before offering evidence regarding the alleged assault. The bench expressed strong dissatisfaction with the reliance placed on these testimonies by the lower courts, noting that the sequence of events and the nature of the evidence failed to establish a chain of circumstances pointing toward the appellant's guilt.

"The testimony of the witnesses to prove the last seen theory does not inspire confidence."

The judgment emphasizes that while the 'last seen' doctrine is a relevant factor in circumstantial evidence cases, it cannot operate in a vacuum. Without supplementary evidence to bridge the gap between the deceased being last seen with the accused and the eventual crime, the theory remains a weak link that cannot support the grave finding of murder.

Judicial Caution Regarding Witness Testimony

The bench specifically highlighted the inconsistency in the prosecution's case, noting that witnesses who had been declared hostile subsequently provided versions that were unreliable. The court's ruling underscores the necessity for trial courts to exercise extreme caution when relying on testimony that shifts in orientation during the course of a trial, especially in cases where such testimony is the sole pillar of the prosecution's argument.

"We also notice that there can be no conviction merely on the basis of the last seen theory without any other incriminating circumstance."

Concluding the matter, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and directed the acquittal of the appellant. The bench clarified that any bonds executed by the appellant for the purpose of his earlier release on remission shall stand cancelled, effectively clearing the appellant of all charges and putting an end to the protracted criminal proceedings.

Date of Decision: 29 July 2026