P&H High Court Acquits Two In 20-Year-Old Double Murder Case, Says Last Seen Theory Alone Insufficient

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has acquitted two persons nearly 20 years after the murder of a woman and her 11-year-old son, holding that the prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of circumstances beyond reasonable doubt and that the "last seen" theory, without corroborative evidence, could not sustain their conviction. [2026 LiveLaw (PH) 244]

Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj and Justice Deepak Manchanda said, "we are of the considered opinion that the prosecution has failed to establish its case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the appellants are entitled to the benefit of doubt. Accordingly, the present appeal is allowed."

The case arose from the murder of Prem Lata and her 11-year-old son, Vimal @ Poppy, in the intervening night of November 5-6, 2006.

The prosecution alleged that Prem Lata, who had resumed living with her husband Krishan after a brief reconciliation despite long-standing matrimonial disputes, had telephoned her family complaining of harassment. Her brother Surender (PW-1) and cousin Baljit (PW-2) went to her matrimonial home to mediate and stayed there overnight. Around 2 a.m., they allegedly saw Krishan, Braham Dutt, Kitabo and Lokesh leaving the house and, on entering, found Prem Lata and her son dead after being strangulated.

A chargesheet was filed against all four accused. During the trial, Krishan died in jail and proceedings continued against the remaining three accused. The trial court convicted Braham Dutt, Kitabo and Lokesh under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced them to life imprisonment. During the pendency of the appeal, Braham Dutt also died, leaving the appeal to survive only in respect of Kitabo and Lokesh.

Senior counsel for the appellants argued that Kitabo and Lokesh had been falsely implicated merely because they were relatives of the deceased's husband. It was submitted that they lived in a separate house outside the village, had no motive to commit the murders, and that the prosecution had failed to prove the presence of the "last seen" witnesses. The defence also pointed to the unexplained delay in registration of the FIR despite the police station being only four kilometres away.

The State contended that PW-1 and PW-2 had consistently supported the prosecution case, that the FIR was promptly registered, and that the appellants, along with Krishan, had harassed the deceased before murdering her and her son.

Examining the evidence, the Division Bench noted that the prosecution case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence and that PW-1 and PW-2 were only "last seen" witnesses, not eyewitnesses to the murders. It found that PW-1, despite being a Haryana Police employee, had produced no official record to establish his presence at the village, while contradictions in PW-2's testimony cast doubt on his presence at the relevant time. The Court also held that the delay in registration of the FIR and the absence of timings in the inquest reports created serious doubts about the prosecution case.

The Bench further observed that the admitted matrimonial dispute was between Prem Lata and her husband Krishan, whereas the appellants lived separately and no independent motive for them to commit the crime had been established.

Relying on the Supreme Court's decisions in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra and Ramanand @ Nandlal Bharti v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the Court reiterated that in a case based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstances consistent only with the guilt of the accused and excluding every other hypothesis.

The Court also relied on Bodh Raj @ Bodha v. State of Jammu and Kashmir and Nizam v. State of Rajasthan to hold that the "last seen" theory cannot, by itself, form the sole basis for conviction in the absence of other corroborative evidence.

Holding that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, the Court extended the benefit of doubt to Kitabo and Lokesh, set aside their conviction and life sentence, and acquitted them of all charges.

Title: Braham Dutt and others v. State of Haryana

 Counsel for the Appellants: Mr. Sartaj Singh Narula, Senior Advocate, with Ms. Vedika Dave, Advocate Counsel for the State: Ms. Shaveta Sanghi, DAG, Haryana

Click here to read the judgement