Supreme Court Acquits Man On Death Row, Cites Faulty Investigation & Gaps In Prosecution Case

The Supreme Court set aside the conviction of an accused (convicted of the death penalty) in a case for allegedly committing the gruesome murder of his six family members, including his four children and brother. The Court cited faulty investigation and flawed recovery of evidence by the Uttar Pradesh police.

"The fabric of the prosecution case is full of holes and holes which are impossible to mend," the Court said.

The Court noted that the prosecution failed to prove any incriminating circumstances such as motive, last seen, and recoveries against the accused.

“the prosecution has failed to prove even one of the three so-called incriminating circumstances i.e., 'motive', 'last seen' and 'recoveries' in its quest to bring home the guilt of the appellant-accused. Even if, for the sake of arguments the evidence of recovery of weapons were to be accepted, the fact remains that the FSL report does not give any indication regarding the grouping of the blood found on the weapons and hence, the recoveries are of no avail to the prosecution.”

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, and Sandeep Mehta heard the case. The prosecution case was solely based on circumstantial evidence, contending that the Appellant murdered his family members due to a land dispute, however, it failed to prove the motive.

Further, the prosecution failed to examine any of the independent witnesses who were present near the crime scene and only relied on the testimonies supplied by the interested witnesses.

Citing the prosecution's faulty investigation, failure to prove motive, last seen, and flawed recovery, the accused appealed to the Supreme Court stating that the prosecution failed to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Setting aside the conviction, the judgment authored by Justice Mehta observed:

“we find that the present one is a case involving utter lackadaisical approach on part of the Investigating Agency as well as the prosecution. The investigation of a case involving gruesome murders of six innocent persons was carried out in a most casual and negligent manner. The Investigating Officer (PW-12) did not examine even a single of the villagers living adjacent to the crime scene for establishing the presence of the appellant-accused at or around the crime scene, corresponding to the time of the incident. No effort whatsoever was made to collect proper evidence of motive. The Investigating Officer (PW-12) failed to collect any evidence whatsoever regarding the safe keeping of the recovered articles/material objects, till the same reached the Forensic Science Laboratory. This utter negligence in conducting the investigation has contributed significantly to the failure of the prosecution's case as against the appellant-accused.”

Accordingly, the Court allowed the appeal, and set aside the conviction of the Appellant.

Case Title: GAMBHIR SINGH VERSUS THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 175

Click here to read/download the judgment

Appearance:

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rakesh Uttamchandra Upadhyay, AOR Ms. Aarti U. Mishra, Adv. Mr. Harsh Som, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sarvesh Singh Baghel, AOR Mr. Sushil Kumar Tomar, Adv. Mr. Shaurya Krishna, Adv.