Rajasthan High Court Acquits Man Sentenced To Death For Wife's Murder, Cites Lapses In Probe

The Rajasthan High Court recently acquitted a man sentenced to death by a trial court for the murder of his wife, holding that the prosecution had failed to establish a complete and unbroken chain of circumstances pointing only to his guilt and that the investigation suffered from serious lapses.

The division bench of Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur and Justice Chandra Shekhar Sharma reiterated that suspicion howsoever strong, could not replace legal proof and where two views were reasonably possible on the evidence, the once favouring the accused prevails.

“…on an overall appreciation of the evidence, this Court finds that the prosecution has failed to establish several essential links in the chain of circumstances. The last seen circumstance remains doubtful; the motive remains unproved; the investigation suffers from material omissions and procedural irregularities; the recoveries are surrounded by serious suspicion; the electronic evidence lacks proper foundational proof; and the medical evidence does not conclusively support the prosecution theory to the exclusion of every other possibility.”

For context, the father of the deceased had filed a complaint, as per which his daughter was married to the accused for about seven years. Around one year before the alleged incident, the accused married another woman post which, the deceased left her matrimonial phone and was residing with her parents.

One fine day, allegedly, she received a call from the accused asking her to meet at a place, post which she left her home and did not return for two days. A missing report was lodged by the complainant that resulted in the finding of the dead body of his daughter. Injuries were visible on her face and head, caused by a stone.

Based on his suspension that his daughter was killed by the accused, by deceitfully calling her to the place of occurrence, the FIR was lodged. The case resulted in the conviction of the accused by the trial court which sentenced him to death. This decision was challenged.

The Court perused the records in detail and found discrepancies, inconsistencies and loopholes at multiple places.

In relation to the testimonies, it was observed that theory of “last seen together” was based on wholly unreliable evidences that suffered from serious infirmities. The Court held that all the evidence was purely hearsay and legally incapable of proving or corroborating the theory.

It was further highlighted that the investigation revealed glaring lapses in collecting independent evidence that included insistences like, the FSL team did not visit the place of recovery and the articles were merely forwarded to the FSL laboratory.

“The cumulative effect of these admissions leaves no manner of doubt that the investigation in the present case was neither complete nor free from serious procedural irregularities. Material witnesses were not promptly examined, independent witnesses were not associated during crucial recoveries, scientific and electronic evidence was inadequately collected, and several vital aspects capable of establishing the guilt or innocence of the accused were left unexplored.”

The Court held that the investigation suffered from substantial infirmities, and the benefit of such lapses could not be shifted to the accused.

In relation to the electronic evidence, the Court observed that in a case relying entirely upon circumstantial evidence, electronic evidence furnish valuable corroborative circumstances.

However, it could not be treated conclusive unless the prosecution first established foundational facts regarding ownership, exclusive possession and use of mobile numbers, authenticity of electronic records, and their nexus with the accused. In the present case, such foundational facts were found to be unsatisfactorily proven.

The Court concluded that the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution were not proven beyond reasonable doubt, neither did they form a complete and unbroken chain pointing towards guilt of accused.

Accordingly, it was held that the prosecution had failed to establish guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt, and the findings of conviction by the trial court suffered from mis-appreciation of evidence and could not be sustained.

Hence, the conviction and the death penalty were set aside, and the accused was directed to be released.

Title: State of Rajasthan v Premlal, and other connected petition

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 287

Click Here To Read/Download Order