Delay in lodging the FIR, delay in examining witnesses, the absence of any eyewitness and the non-examination of the Investigating Officer left the Patna High Court with “no option but to acquit” a man sentenced to life for the 2005 murder of a boy in Khagaria.
Patna: The Patna High Court has set aside the conviction of Musahru Sahni under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and his sentence of life imprisonment for the 2005 murder of a young boy in Khagaria district, holding that the prosecution case was undermined by delay in lodging the FIR, belated statements of the claimed eyewitnesses and the non-examination of the Investigating Officer [Musahru Sahni v. State of Bihar].
A Division Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh and Justice Ansul, in a judgment authored by Justice Ansul, allowed the appeal against the judgment of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, F.T.C.-5, Khagaria, dated January 14, 2008, which had also awarded four years’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 201 IPC.
The case
According to the record, the boy went missing on June 28, 2005 around 6 pm. His body was found near a field, and the FIR was lodged at 8:15 am on June 29, 2005, after the body was recovered. In the FIR, the father said that “unknown persons” had killed his son. The prosecution later alleged that the appellant was seen dragging the boy and that he confessed when villagers caught him. These remain the prosecution’s allegations, which the High Court found were not proved to the required standard.
Eyewitnesses who surfaced late
PW-3, who claimed to be an eyewitness, had his statement recorded on July 12, 2005, after a delay of 12 days. PW-10, who claimed to have seen blood on the appellant’s clothes, and PW-11, who claimed to have seen the assault, had their statements recorded on August 22, 2005. The informant claimed that the child went with another person, although the FIR said he left home alone. The Bench said:
“These are monumental delays for persons who were eye-witnesses to the occurrence and give rise to bona fide doubt regarding veracity of their statements and them being eye-witnesses.”
The Court added that these persons were not witnesses to any part of the occurrence and appeared to have been introduced during investigation to buttress the prosecution case. A witness who said the appellant admitted guilt only after being assaulted by the police was not an eyewitness, and several other witnesses only saw the body.
Medical timeline and the unexamined IO
The post-mortem was conducted at 2:10 pm on June 29, 2005, and the doctor put the time since death at 24 to 26 hours, which would take the time of death to about 2:10 pm on June 28 or earlier, whereas the prosecution case was that the boy left home at 6 pm that day. The doctor also said the head injuries could be possible from a fall from a tree.
The Investigating Officer was not examined, and no explanation for the delays came from him. Relying on Lahu Kamlakar Patil v. State of Maharashtra (2013) 6 SCC 417, the Bench noted that non-examination of the IO is not by itself fatal but becomes so where such lacunae exist.
Acquittal
The Court concluded:
“Thus, taking an overall view of the matter, the delay in lodging of the FIR, the delay in examination of witnesses and the resultant absence of any eye-witness, and the non-examination of the IO, this Court has no option but to acquit the appellant.”
The conviction of January 14, 2008 and the sentence of January 16, 2008 were set aside, and the appellant, on bail since February 24, 2010, was discharged from his bail bonds.
Why The Patna High Court Judgment Matters
The ruling shows that witnesses first examined weeks or months after a killing, and an unexplained failure to examine the Investigating Officer, can unravel a murder conviction resting on late-appearing eyewitnesses and a confession allegedly made in the presence of villagers.
If you know of a child in danger or distress, call CHILDLINE at 1098.
Case Title: Musahru Sahni v. State of Bihar [Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 185 of 2008]
Bench: Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh and Justice Ansul, Patna High Court
Date of Judgment: October 5, 2026
Appearances: Advocate Ranjeet Kumar Singh for the Appellant; APP D.K. Sinha for the State