- Two brothers were acquitted after 17 years in a 2009 murder case in Madhya Pradesh
- The court found serious flaws in the investigation and prosecution's evidence
- There were contradictions in statements and doubts over the FIR's authenticity
Tulsiram and Harprasad Rajpal had landed in jail over a 2009 high-profile murder case in Madhya Pradesh. After 17 years, several flaws have emerged in their prosecution and earned them the benefit of doubt. The Madhya Pradesh High Court has acquitted the two brothers and ordered their immediate release.
A division bench comprising Justices Vivek Agarwal and Avnindra Kumar Singh identified serious flaws in the investigation and the evidence presented by the prosecution.
Contradictions and suspicious circumstances in the probe cast doubt on the prosecution's narrative and make it inappropriate to convict the accused based on such evidence, the court observed.
The case pertains to the murder of Pyarelal Gadariya in Damoh district. Gadariya was stabbed to death on August 25, 2009. The police had named Tulsiram and Harprasad as suspects in the case.
In 2012, a sessions court in Damoh convicted them and sentenced them to life imprisonment. The two then challenged the verdict in high court through their lawyer Ajay Kumar Jain.
'Serious Lapses'
The high court spotted "serious lapses" in the prosecution's case. During the hearing, the investigating officer could not state which police official had drafted the FIR. Moreover, the official who had prepared the FIR was not produced in court to testify.
The statements made by the victim's family before the court were also found to be inconsistent. The victim's son stated that his father died immediately after leaving the police station, whereas his wife claimed he was alive until they reached the hospital. The doctor who checked him testified that the victim was already dead by the time he was brought to the hospital.
The court also noted that while the victim used to sign his name, the FIR had his thumb impression, casting doubt on the authenticity of the document. The bench considered the possibility that the FIR could have been prepared after the victim's death and that his thumb impression was affixed to it.
The court also questioned why the medical referral documents regarding his transfer to the hospital were not on record if he was alive at the time. The prosecution's answer was not found to be satisfactory.
Besides, the forensic report did not find bloodstains on the knife that the police seized and claimed as the murder weapon. There was also a delay of 15-30 days in recording witness statements, the court noted. There was no explanation.
'Benefit Of Doubt'
After examining the circumstances and evidence, the high court concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove the charges against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.
Citing serious flaws in the investigation, contradictions in the statements, and questions regarding the credibility of the evidence, the court set aside the life sentences of the two brothers and ordered their release.
Inputs by Sanjeev Chowdhury
