Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Consent Is No Defence When Victim Is Under 16: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Granting Pre-Arrest Bail in Minor Rape Cases Would Send a Harmful Societal Signal: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Accused Citing POCSO’s Rigorous Standards Void Marriage No Shield Against Cruelty Charges: Karnataka High Court Affirms Section 498A Applies Even In Deceptive and Void Marital Relationships Consolidation Authorities Cannot Confer Ownership Or Alter Scheme Post Confirmation Without Due Process: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Jurisdiction Over Void Post-Scheme Orders Litigation Policy is Not Law, Can’t Enforce Guidelines Through Courts: Rajasthan High Court Refuses to Entertain Quo Warranto Against Additional Advocate General’s Appointment Police and Lawyers Are Two Limbs of Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance in Police Misconduct Incident Sole Testimony, Forensic Gaps, and Withheld Witness: No Conviction Possible: Delhi High Court Affirms Acquittal in Murder Trial Remand Keeps the Dispute Alive – Not Arrears: Bombay High Court Holds SVLDRS Relief Must Be Computed Under Litigation Category Use of ‘Absconding’ in Employment Context Not Defamatory Per Se, But A Privileged Communication Under Exception 7 of Section 499 IPC: Allahabad High Court Daughter’s Right Extinguished When Partition Effected Prior to 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Trial Courts Cannot Direct Filing of Challan After Conviction — Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Directions Against DSP Veer Singh Rule 4 Creates Parity, Not a Parallel Pension Pipeline: Rajasthan High Court Denies Dual Pension to Ex-Chief Justice Serving as SHRC Chairperson Right to Be Heard Must Be Preserved Where Claim Has a Legal Basis: Orissa High Court Upholds Impleadment of Will Beneficiary in Partition Suit Long-Term Ad Hocism Is Exploitation, Not Employment: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of Junior Typist After 25 Years Of Service PIL Cannot Be a Tool for Personal Grievances: Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Body’s Power to Revise Property Tax After 16 Years Omission of Accused’s Name by Eyewitness in FIR is a Fatal Lacuna: Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Murder Correction In Revenue Map Under Section 30 Isn’t A Tool To Shift Plot Location After 17 Years: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Remand Casteist Abuses Must Be In Public View: Supreme Court Quashes SC/ST Act Proceedings Where Alleged Insults Occurred Inside Complainant’s House Resignation Bars Pension, But Not Gratuity: Supreme Court Draws Sharp Line Between Voluntary Retirement and Resignation in DTC Employee Case

Supreme Court Quashes Conviction and Sentences in Heinous Rape and Murder Case Due to Investigation Lapses

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has quashed the conviction and sentences imposed on the appellant in a high-profile rape and murder case involving a six-year-old child. The apex court cited multiple irregularities, contradictions, and gaps in the prosecution's case and investigation, leading to the failure of establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The judgment was delivered by a three-judge bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai, Vikram Nath, and Sanjay Karol.

The case revolved around the horrific rape and murder of a young girl, which sent shockwaves across the nation. While acknowledging the heinous nature of the crime and the immense pain and suffering endured by the victim and her family, the court emphasized the necessity of ensuring a fair and thorough investigation in such cases. The court observed that the prosecution had failed to undergo the necessary lengths and efforts to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.

During the course of the proceedings, the court pointed out various irregularities in the investigation, including the changing of investigating officers, non-compliance with legal provisions, delays in sample analysis, lack of proper documentation, and unanswered questions. Notably, the court highlighted the non-compliance with Section 53A of the Criminal Procedure Code, which governs the collection and preservation of samples for DNA analysis. The unexplained delays in sending the samples for analysis and the compromised integrity of the evidence raised serious doubts about its reliability.

The court emphasized that while DNA evidence can be a valuable tool in criminal investigations, it is not infallible. Citing previous judgments, the court highlighted the need for caution in relying solely on DNA evidence and the importance of considering other corroborative evidence in each case. In this particular instance, the court found that the circumstances forming the chain of commission of the crime did not conclusively point to the appellant's guilt.

The judgment also highlighted the role and responsibilities of investigating authorities in ensuring the protection of citizens and conducting fair and proper investigations. The court expressed concern over the numerous lapses in the investigation of this dastardly crime, which compromised the quest for justice and left the actual perpetrator unpunished.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals and quashed the judgment of the lower courts. The conviction and sentences imposed on the appellant under Sections 302 (murder), 376 (rape), 377 (unnatural offenses), and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) of the Indian Penal Code were set aside.

DATE OF DECISION: 19th May, 2023

Prakash Nishad @ Kewat Zinak Nishad   vs State of Maharashtra     

Latest Legal News