Gaps in evidence, high threshold to reverse acquittal: Why Bombay High Court rejected appeal in Sohrabuddin case

Nearly two decades after the controversial killings of Sohrabuddin Shaikh, his wife Kausar Bi and associate Tulsiram Prajapati, the Bombay High Court on Thursday upheld a 2018 special CBI court verdict that acquitted 22 accused, mostly police personnel. [Rubabuddin Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra & Ors.]

A division bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A Ankhad held there was no ground to interfere with the acquittal since the prosecution’s circumstantial case contained several “broken links” and failed to establish either a fake encounter or a larger conspiracy.

‘High threshold’ for overturning acquittals

The Court emphasised on the narrow scope to interfere with an acquittal in appeal.

“A judgment of acquittal cannot be interfered in a casual or cavalier manner and it is not permissible in law to overturn the judgment only on the ground that another view is possible,” the bench observed.

It added that the judgment of acquittal strengthens the presumption of innocence of the accused and a higher threshold is required to rebut the same in an appeal against acquittal.

The judges cited Supreme Court rulings to hold that an appellate court must first see whether the trial court thoroughly appreciated the evidence and whether its view is at least a “fairly possible” one; if two plausible views exist, the one consistent with innocence must prevail.

Hostile witnesses, weak conspiracy and sanction

The bench said the prosecution had not shown a complete chain linking the accused to any agreement to eliminate Sohrabuddin and Prajapati under the guise of encounters. 

“The case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence and there are several broken links in the chain of circumstances,” the C[ourt held. 

Alleged statements by Prajapati about a plan to kill him and Sohrabuddin were held unqualified as dying declarations, and the Court noted there was no proven motive or evidence of political or monetary benefit to the accused. 

It also accepted the trial court’s view that except for one private accused, the others were public servants acting or purporting to act in discharge of official duty. 

This invoked the bar under Section 197 CrPC regarding the absence of prior government sanction.

Acquittal upheld

The bench endorsed the trial judge’s conclusion that the prosecution had not proved the alleged abduction of Sohrabuddin, Kausar Bi and Prajapati from a Hyderabad–Sangli luxury bus, their illegal detention at farmhouses, or the burning and disposal of Kausar Bi’s body. 

With 92 of 210 witnesses turning hostile and none of the 77 key witnesses emerging as eyewitnesses to the alleged fake encounters, the Court said the chain of circumstances required for conviction was simply not there. 

Medical and ballistic experts also did not back the theory of staged encounters or self‑inflicted injuries allegedly planted to legitimise police action, the Court stated.