NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has acquitted a man who spent a decade on death row for the rape and murder of a child in Uttarakhand, citing a deeply flawed investigation and trial marred by planted evidence and procedural lapses.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, and Sandeep Mehta overturned the conviction and death sentence, criticizing both the Uttarakhand police and the trial court for mishandling the case. “There is not even a semblance of credible evidence against the appellant,” the bench said after reviewing the forensic reports and trial proceedings.
The case dates back to June 2016 in Udham Singh Nagar, where a young girl went missing during a religious jagran. Her body was found in a nearby field the following day. The man, who was working at the event handling sound and lights, was arrested soon after—despite no initial witnesses placing him with the girl. Only later did witnesses change their statements once he was named as an accused.
‘Evidence was planted’: SC tears into police claims
The court strongly rejected the police’s version of events, particularly a so-called confession and the recovery of the accused’s clothes. According to police, the accused had hidden the clothes he wore during the crime in a bag and intended to discard them but was caught before he could do so.
Calling this version “totally unbelievable,” the judges observed:
“It is clear as daylight that these recoveries were planted. It is hard to believe that a man, free to move around for two days, would keep incriminating evidence on him, conveniently for the police to later recover.”
The court further flagged serious irregularities in the handling of forensic samples. The doctor who examined the victim was never cross-examined and failed to specify whether the samples were sealed or who received them. The court said this left open the possibility of tampering by the police to influence forensic results.
Trial court proceedings also flawed
The apex court also found that the trial was unfair and the accused was not properly represented. One glaring example was the trial court allowing Sub-Inspector Prahlad Singh to narrate, word-for-word, the alleged confession of the accused—a move the Supreme Court called “grossly illegal.”
“The trial was conducted in a lopsided manner, denying the accused a fair chance at justice,” the bench concluded.
With this judgment, the Supreme Court has not only quashed the conviction and sentence but has also spotlighted critical issues in India’s criminal justice system—particularly the danger of miscarriage of justice due to investigative negligence and judicial oversight.
