9 Death Penalties Commuted, 2 Acquittals: Rajasthan High Court Decides All Pending Death Sentence References
In a significant development, the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur has delivered its verdict in all pending death-sentence reference cases. While the first reference was decided on October 3, 2025 (in State Vs. Arjun Singh), the remaining 10 references were decided this year, the last verdict being pronounced on August 6 by a division bench of Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur and Justice Chandra...
In a significant development, the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur has delivered its verdict in all pending death-sentence reference cases.
While the first reference was decided on October 3, 2025 (in State Vs. Arjun Singh), the remaining 10 references were decided this year, the last verdict being pronounced on August 6 by a division bench of Justice Vinit Kumar Mathur and Justice Chandra Shekhar Sharma.
In total, the division bench decided 10 death-penalty references between April 7 to August 6.
Out of these 11 references, only two cases resulted in an acquittal. In the remaining nine cases the death sentence was commuted. Majority of these cases pertain to offences concerning rape and murder of minors.
Amongst the 10 cases disposed of this year, the oldest reference was filed in 2021 (State Vs. Dinesh) for murder and POCSO Act offences, two references were filed in 2022 (State Vs. Jitendra @ Jitu and State Vs Narpat Singh), both cases pertaining to rape and murder of minor girls.
One reference was filed in 2023 (State Vs Ramesh Kumar Dhakad pertaining to rape and murder of minor girl), while two references were filed in 2024 ( State Vs. Kalu where offences pertained to murder and rape of minor, State Vs Kamlesh Aka Karan, where offences pertained to kidnapping, rape of minor and murder). In 2025, four references were filed, which pertained to offence of murder.
For instance, the high court in its July 14 decision in State of Rajasthan v Premlal, acquitted a man awarded capital punishment for his wife's murder, 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.
In this case 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 home and was residing with her parents.
The prosecution alleged that the wife received a call from the accused asking her to meet, 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.
The Court perused the records in detail and found discrepancies, inconsistencies and loopholes at multiple places.
“…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," the court said.
In another case which resulted in an acquittal–State of Rajasthan v Arjun, the high court acquitted a man convicted and sentenced to death by the trial for the murder of two children-a boy and a girl, wherein he was also convicted for sexually assaulting the minor girl.
The prosecution alleged that minor boy had an altercation with the accused over cutting of a tree branch, after which the accused murdered him. It was alleged that the minor girl, who was the boy's sister, had witnessed her brother's murder and so the accused with the intent to destroy any evidence, committed rape and subsequently murdered the minor girl.
The high court observed that the present case was based solely on circumstantial evidence, wherein the prosecution had miserably failed to establish any chain of events leading to the offence being committed by the accused. The high court found that no motive could be established, medical reports were inconclusive and recoveries were made in absence of any independent witness which thus could not be relied up.
"thus, the prosecution has failed to establish the case beyond all reasonable doubt so as to hold the accused/appellant guilty of the offences. It is a bit astonishing to note that a case wherein this Court is facing difficulty to find any trace of evidence supporting the case of the prosecution, the accused/appellant has been convicted with death sentence by the learned Trial Court. Not a whisper is found in the impugned judgment so as to make the present case fall within the category of "rarest of the rare" case," the high court remarked on the trial court order not mentioning any finding on 'rarest of rare case', it held.