Gauhati Court Overturns Death Sentence, Acquits Man In 2018 Rape-Murder Case

In a significant judicial intervention that underscores the fragile nature of capital punishment verdicts, the Gauhati High Court has acquitted a man who spent nearly eight years on death row for the alleged rape and murder of an 11-year-old girl in Assam's Nagaon district, completely dismantling the September 2018 trial court judgment that had condemned him to the gallows.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Ashutosh Kumar and Justice Arun Dev Choudhury meticulously dismantled the prosecution's case against Nagaon resident Zakir Hussain, overturning his conviction and directing his immediate release from custody unless required in any other legal proceedings.

The case originated from a harrowing incident in March 2018 in Batadrava, Nagaon district, where a young girl was allegedly assaulted and set ablaze—a crime that ignited widespread public fury across Assam and galvanized mass protests demanding stricter punitive measures against sexual offenders.

Hussain, recorded as 19 years old at the time of the incident in police records, had been handed the death penalty by the Nagaon District and Sessions Court in September 2018 for murder, alongside a life sentence for rape under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

According to the initial complaint lodged by the victim's family at Batadrava Police Station, three individuals had allegedly committed the crimes, all of whom were subsequently apprehended. However, defense counsel Anan Kumar Bhuiyan revealed that two of the accused were juveniles and processed separately under the Juvenile Justice Act.

The legal framework mandates that any death penalty awarded by a district court requires confirmation by the High Court—a provision that sent the case to the Gauhati High Court for review. Additionally, Hussain's family independently challenged the conviction through a separate appeal.

Following extensive hearings spanning multiple days, the High Court conducted a thorough re-examination of the evidence on record before arriving at its acquittal decision. The defense counsel highlighted critical discrepancies that had been overlooked by the trial court.

"There was a dying declaration left by the victim before her death," Bhuiyan stated. "While the trial court relied heavily on this to award the death penalty, we meticulously exposed the glaring mismatches in evidence records and the statements of prime witnesses—including police officials and the doctor involved in the initial investigation."

The prosecution had alleged that the Class-V student was gang-raped and set on fire at her residence in Dhaniabheti Lalung Gaon under Batadrava on March 23, 2018, while she was alone at home. The young girl suffered catastrophic burn injuries and succumbed while being transferred from Nagaon Civil Hospital to Gauhati Medical College and Hospital.

Police had moved swiftly, filing a charge sheet within weeks of the incident. The trial court had identified Hussain as the principal accused, convicting him while acquitting five other adult teens—Abdul Rejak, Jubeda Khatun, Mukhlesur Rahman, Abdul Rasid, and Fakaruddin—citing insufficient evidence. The two juvenile offenders were separately tried and sentenced to three years in a correctional facility.

The defense's challenge centered on fundamental contradictions between medical examination reports and the allegations made by the victim's family. "The family claimed she was gang-raped and that her private parts, including her rectum, were damaged with sharp weapons," Bhuiyan explained. "However, the medical reports conclusively showed no damage whatsoever to her private parts."

The dying declaration itself came under intense scrutiny, as nearly 90 percent of the victim's body—including her lips—had been severely burnt at the time of recording. "The timing of the statement recording did not align with the events. Furthermore, police claimed the statement was given in Assamese, but her mother later testified that their family does not speak Assamese at all," Bhuiyan added.

Advocate Ziaul Kamar, appointed as amicus curiae, noted that several key pieces of evidence were never produced before the court. After comprehensive hearings, the bench concluded that Hussain was not guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

"This is a court order and we must respect it, though it remains challengeable before the Supreme Court," Kamar stated, adding that no immediate decision has been taken regarding a potential appeal.

The ruling casts a sobering light on the reliability of evidence in sensitive cases and the critical importance of judicial scrutiny in death penalty matters, where the margin for error must be zero.