The Supreme Court of India Today (Feb 11) acquitted Gambhir Singh, who was sentenced to death for the 2012 murder of his brother, sister-in-law, and their four children, citing serious flaws in the prosecution’s case. The Court found no strong evidence proving his guilt, highlighting failures in proving motive, last-seen evidence, and weapon recovery. “The fabric of the prosecution case is full of holes and holes which are impossible to mend,” the Bench noted while ordering Singh’s immediate release.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India, on Tuesday, declared a man innocent who was earlier sentenced to death for the 2012 murder of his brother, sister-in-law, and their four children.
The Court found that the prosecution’s case was filled with serious mistakes and inconsistencies that could not be corrected.
“The fabric of the prosecution case is full of holes and holes which are impossible to mend,”
-said the Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, and Sandeep Mehta while announcing the acquittal of Gambhir Singh.
The Court also pointed out that the prosecution did not provide any strong proof to support their claims and could not establish the accused’s motive behind the crime.
“No plausible evidence has been brought on record by the prosecution to prove the above story so as to establish the motive attributed to the appellant-accused,”
-the Court observed.
In 2012, the police arrested Gambhir Singh along with a woman named Gayatri and a minor for allegedly killing his brother, Satyabhan, sister-in-law, Pushpa, and their four children. The murder was reportedly linked to a property dispute in Agra.
In 2017, the trial court found Singh guilty and sentenced him to death. However, Gayatri was acquitted. Later, in 2019, the Allahabad High Court upheld Singh’s conviction. Singh then appealed to the Supreme Court.
During the hearing, the Supreme Court found that the prosecution failed to prove Singh’s guilt. The key pieces of evidence, such as the accused’s motive, the claim that he was last seen at the crime scene, and the recovery of weapons, were not properly established.
“We further feel that the Public Prosecutor conducting the trial and so also the Presiding Officer of the trial Court were totally remiss while conducting the trial. The evidence of the material prosecution witness in a case involving gruesome murders of six persons including four innocent children was recorded in a most casual and lackadaisical manner, without adhering to the mandatory procedural requirements of the Evidence Act,”
-the Court noted.
The Court also criticized the investigating officer for not ensuring the proper handling of important evidence. It was found that there was no proof of how the recovered articles were stored before they reached the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL).
This negligence in investigation played a major role in weakening the prosecution’s case against Singh.
The Court stated that the prosecution failed to establish even one of the three most important pieces of evidence—‘motive,’ ‘last seen,’ and ‘recoveries’—that were necessary to prove the accused guilty.
Even if the weapons were considered recovered, the forensic report did not confirm whether the blood found on them matched the victims. Because of this, the recovery of weapons did not help the prosecution in proving their case.
The Supreme Court also criticized the Allahabad High Court for not properly examining these major flaws in the case.
“…the impugned judgments do not stand to scrutiny and deserves to be set aside. As a consequence, the conviction of the appellant-accused and death sentence handed down to him can also not be sustained,”
-the Bench added.
With this decision, the Supreme Court canceled Singh’s conviction and ordered that he should be immediately released from jail, unless he was required in any other case.
Advocates Rakesh Uttamchandra Upadhyay, Aarti U Mishra, and Harsh Som represented Singh, while Advocates Sarvesh Singh Baghel, Sushil Kumar Tomar, and Shaurya Krishna appeared for the respondents.
CASE TITLE:
Gambhir Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on CJI Sanjeev Khanna
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
