The division bench of Justice Ravindra Maithani and Justice Alok Verma of the Uttarakhand High Court has acquitted two individuals who were previously sentenced to life imprisonment by an additional district judge in Dehradun in 2016 for murder charges.
DEHRADUN: Recently, The division bench of Justice Ravindra Maithani and Justice Alok Verma of the Uttarakhand High Court has acquitted two individuals who were previously sentenced to life imprisonment by an additional district judge in Dehradun in 2016 for murder charges. The accused had been incarcerated since their arrest.
READ ALSO: Gangster Chhota Rajan Convicted in ‘2001 Jaya Shetty Murder Case’ in Mumbai
The incident took place in 2008, when Mahboob Hasan was found dead in his shop in Vikas Nagar. The suspects, Phool Singh and Mohd Irfan, were arrested on January 5, 2009, and the police recovered an iron rod based on their information.
After reviewing the evidence, the High Court concluded that the prosecution’s case, which relied entirely on circumstantial evidence, failed to establish a coherent and compelling narrative.
The court stated,
“This court is of the view that the prosecution has completely failed to prove the charges against the appellants. Accordingly, the judgment and order passed in the case deserves to be set aside.”
Background
Hasan was found dead in his shop on the morning of December 31, 2008, after having slept there the previous night. His relative, Shoaib Ahmed, lodged a report, which resulted in the registration of an FIR under IPC sections 302 and 120-B at Vikasnagar police station. The post-mortem report indicated three injuries to Hasan’s body. The prosecution claimed that Mohd Irfan and Phool Singh were apprehended and, based on their statements, an iron rod and a knife, allegedly used in the crime, were recovered.
READ ALSO: Two Convicted to Life, Three Acquitted in Activist Narendra Dabholkar Murder Case
“The prosecution has not been able to prove any last seen evidence. Even the forensic science report does not connect the alleged recovered articles to the offence,” the lawyer argued.
The counsel for the appellants argued that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt and that the lower court had erred in convicting and sentencing the appellants.
The defence contended that the only evidence presented was that the appellants were seen near the crime scene on December 30, which they argued was insufficient and lacked any substantial connection to the incident.
Moreover, they asserted that the recovered rod and knife were not definitively linked to the crime. The defence highlighted that the forensic report did not connect the recovered items to the offence.
READ ALSO: Kerala Court Convicts 15 Persons in BJP Leader Ranjith Srinivasan Murder Case
After considering these arguments, the High Court emphasized that the case relied on circumstantial evidence. In such cases, the prosecution must establish a chain of circumstances that unequivocally points to the guilt of the accused. The court found that this burden was not met and thus acquitted the appellants.
