MP High Court acquits father-son duo in fake murder case, slamming police for fabricated evidence and asking, “Can a dead man make calls?” in a scathing judgment.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
MADHYA PRADESH: The Madhya Pradesh High Court has acquitted a man and his son who were previously sentenced to life imprisonment for the alleged murder of a young man said to be in a relationship with their daughter/sister.
The Division Bench, comprising Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice A.K. Singh, overturned the Mandla district court’s 2023 conviction, describing the police investigation as “dishonest,” “mechanical,” and “fabricated.”
What was the Case?
The case revolved around the death of Rajendra, who was alleged to be in a relationship with the daughter/sister of the accused, Nain Singh Dhurve, and his son. The Sessions Court in Mandla had, in November 2023, convicted both for murder based on what now appears to be a severely flawed investigation.
The High Court’s doubt was raised by a contradiction in the timeline, i.e., Call Detail Records (CDRs) revealed Rajendra was in contact with the girl as late as September 25, 2021, several days after the postmortem report recorded his date of death. With biting sarcasm, the Bench observed:
“Science has yet not developed so much as to enable a deceased person to connect through mobile phone and talk to the daughter of the accused person.”
This contradiction, the Court held, exposed a crucial lacuna and cast serious doubt on the integrity of the police investigation.
ALSO READ: “Sham Trials Must Not Go Unchecked”: Supreme Court Reopens 1984 Anti-Sikh Riot Acquittals
One of the prosecution’s key claims relied on the testimony of an alleged eyewitness, Chet Singh, who said he saw the accused beating someone on the night of Rajendra’s disappearance, September 19, 2021. But the Court labeled Singh’s account as manufactured and went so far as to describe him as an “implanted witness.”
Singh, who was in Kerala at the time for work, conveniently resurfaced five months after the incident to support the prosecution’s narrative, a coincidence the Court found too convenient to be credible.
Moreover, the Court noted with concern that Rajendra’s family had never informed the police about any romantic relationship or suspicions against the accused. Most disturbingly, the police never examined the girl whose alleged relationship with the victim formed the foundation of the prosecution’s case.
High Court’s Observations
The judgment stops at acquittal and served as a powerful indictment of investigative practices in the state. The Court announced the apparent eagerness of the police to file a chargesheet rather than carry out a fair and unbiased investigation.
“This lacuna reveals how dishonest is the status of investigation in the state of Madhya Pradesh.”
Raised by the procedural lapses and possible misuse of the legal system, the Court directed the Director General of Police (DGP), Madhya Pradesh, to:
- Initiate a departmental inquiry against the investigating officer and other officials involved.
- Formulate and implement guidelines for proper investigation to safeguard citizens’ rights.
- Submit a report within 30 days detailing the inquiry and action taken.
The Court observed,
“Let enquiry be conducted as to what makes them to implant false witnesses to take away life and liberty of innocent citizens and the report be furnished within thirty days thereafter.”
Further, the state’s government advocate was instructed to furnish a certified copy of the judgment and the names of the concerned officers to the DGP for immediate action.
During cross-examination, the High Court observed that Chain Singh admitted he had gone to Kerala for work and only learned about the incident after being brought back to Madhya Pradesh by the police. The Court said,
“Thus, it is evident Chain Singh (PW-6) is not a witness of last seen or an eye witness. He was planted by the Police for which we shall be ordering a separate enquiry against the I.O. to be conducted by the Senior Police Official for making false accusation and planting false witnesses. The prosecution did not re-examine this witness to extract any contradiction on the last statement that he came to know about the incident when Police brought him from Kerala. Thus, it is a gross failure on the part of the concerned Public Prosecutor who conducted the trial.”
These gaps in the prosecution’s case show the dishonest state of investigation, the High Court lamented,
“Science has yet not so developed to enable a deceased person to connect through mobile phone and talk to daughter of the accused person. This is another lacuna which reveals that how dishonest is the status of investigation in the State of Madhya Pradesh and all the prosecution witnesses including Police officials resorts to lies to just complete investigation and file charge sheet rather than carrying out honest, transparent and independent investigation.”
Appearance:
Shri Devendra Kumar Shuka – Advocate for the appellants.
Shri Ajay Tamrakar – Government Advocate for the State of M.P.
CASE TITLE: NEIN SINGH DHURVE AND OTHERS Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 306 of 2024
READ JUDGMENT HERE
Click Here to Read More Reports On Acquittal
