Sohrabuddin Shaikh Case | '92 Witnesses Turning Hostile Serious Concern' : Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Against Acquittals

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Baghchi and Justice V Mohana issued notices to the acquitted persons on the petition filed by Rubabuddin Shaikh, younger brother of the deceased Sohrabuddin Shaikh.

During the hearing, the bench expressed concerns about the fact that 92 witnesses turned hostile during the trial.

"92 witnesses turning hostile is a serious concern. Although it was a concurrent finding, whether there was a fair and just trial - that's to be considered," Justice Bagchi observed.

The Chief Justice also expressed a similar view, saying that the bench would like to examine the statements of some of the witnesses. 

Senior Advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu, for the petitioner, submitted that it was a case of "fake encounter", where the petitioner's brother, sister-in-law and friend were killed in "cold-blooded murder." Naidu submitted that the petitioner's brother was critical of the police, and he was picked up during a bus journey from Hyderabad by plainclothes policemen and later encountered.

Naidu said that the petitioner had been pursuing the matter since 2010, and it was at his instance that the matter was transferred to the CBI. He highlighted that the acquittal was founded upon the witnesses turning hostile, and the matter needed a relook.

Senior Advocate K Parameshwar, appearing for some of the acquitted persons, submitted that it was a case of "concurrent findings of acquittal by very reasoned judgments"

Justice Bagchi however said, "You should satisfy our conscience, wholesale witness turning hostile!"

"We would like to issue notice, we would like to see the statements of some of the witnesses...we want to satisfy ourselves", CJI Surya Kant said.

Parameshwar said that the matter can be listed for an early hearing, as the accused do not want this matter to hang over their heads for a long time.

Naidu also informed that Nayabuddin Shaikh, another brother of the deceased, has also filed a petition, and requested that both the matters be tagged.

Will not re-examine Amit Shah's discharge

At the same time, the bench said that it will not examine any challenge to the discharge of Amit Shah in the case. In the appeal in the High Court, an intervenor named Maniar Kalpesh Kumar had filed an application challenging the trial court's December 2014 discharge of Amit Shah in the case. The Bombay High Court, sa per paragraph 43 of the judgment, dismissed the application, noting that the Bombay High Court and Supreme Court had earlier rejected petitions challenging Amit Shah's discharge, and that the application was filed suppressing these facts. The High Court had observed that the application appeared to have been filed with "an oblique motive at the instance of political adversaries."

Both CJI Surya Kant and Justice Bagchi said that the Supreme Court will not enter into paragraph 43 of the High Court's judgment.

Background

As per the prosecution, Sohrabuddin Shaikh, his wife Kausar Bi, and his aide Tulsiram Prajapati were abducted by a police team while travelling in a bus from Hyderabad to Maharashtra in 2005. Shaikh who was allegedly killed in an encounter near Ahmedabad and his wife three days later. His aide, Prajapati was killed in another encounter on Gujarat-Rajasthan border in 2006.

The Supreme Court directed the investigation to be transferred from Gujarat Crime Investigation Department (CID) to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) while also directing the trial to be shifted from Gujarat to Mumbai. The case of Prajapati's encounter killing was also clubbed with that of Shaikh.

Out of 210 witnesses, 92 turned hostile. In 2018, the Special CBI Court in Mumbai acquitted all the accused persons, holding that the prosecution had failed to establish a cogent case of any conspiracy to kill Shaikh and others.

In 2019, an appeal was filed before the Bombay High Court challenging the acquittal orders, which was recently decided in Rubabuddin Shaikh v Central Bureau of Investigation, holding that there was no ground to interfere with the trial court's judgment, observing that the prosecution's case rested on circumstantial evidence with “several broken links in the chain of circumstances.” The High Court found that the prosecution had failed to establish that Shaikh and Kausar Bi were abducted by the police, and had failed to establish any motive for staging a fake encounter. It further held that the large number of hostile witnesses did not, ipso facto, permit an inference that the trial had not been conducted properly. It also recorded that there was no evidence to establish any politician-police nexus behind the alleged encounters.

Case : RUBABUDDIN SHAIKH Vs THE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION | D No. 48619/2026