"Serious gaps": Delhi High Court acquits man serving life term in prison for decade-old murder, dacoity

A man serving life term imprisonment in a case of murder and robbery that took place 12 years ago, was acquitted by the Delhi High Court on the ground of “serous gaps” in the case of the prosecution [Sandeep v. State]..A bench of Justices Mukta Gupta and Anish Dayal was hearing an appeal filed by a man who had been sentenced to life-term imprisonment in April, 2022.The incident took place on April 25, 2010, when the police learnt that an alleged murder and robbery had taken place inside a jewellery shop in the national capital. The man, who worked as a driver, was arrested on the basis of “secret information” and a statement given by a witness in the case, during the investigation. The shop owner was the deceased’s brother and a key witness in the case.The defence counsel besides pointing out mismatch in DNA samples from the scene of crime and the appellant, cited several other lacunae in the police’s case.On the other hand, the prosecution contended that appellant’s motive behind the crime was money since he had to repay the debt for the treatment of his ailing father..The High Court after “meticulous" examination of evidence and documents on the record, opined that there were a number of “critical gaps” in the chain of circumstantial evidence in addition to discrepancies in the testimonies of the eyewitness.The prosecution, it said, wasn’t able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, among other factor, due to:.- The eye-witnesses who had last seen the deceased along with an unknown person had neither identified nor been able to name the unknown person sitting with the deceased at the shop;- Apart from the deceased’s brother suspicion on the appellant, there was “absolutely no basis” or context given by the prosecution to substantiate the same;- Somewhere along the investigation, an assumption was made that the appellant committed the crime. Presumption of the eye witnesses that the appellant was the same person who was the perpetrator of the crime as he was last seen with the deceased a few hours prior to the crime, cannot establish the guilt beyond reasonable doubt;- At no stage was any sketch made of the alleged last seen person with the deceased;- There was no evidence led by the prosecution forensically linking the paper-cutter (weapon used in the crime) allegedly recovered at the instance of the appellant and the blood-stained clothes of the appellant with that of the deceased;- Recovery of jewellery pieces from the appellant's house in his presence with witnesses does not inspire confidence..The Bench, therefore, noted prosecution's failure in proving the chain of circumstantial evidence "beyond reasonable doubt" against the appellant."There are serious gaps in the linkages of evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution which cannot sustain a finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt....The appeal is accordingly disposed of and the appellant is acquitted of the charges framed," the Court ruled..Advocates Neha Kapoor and Kushal Mehra represented the appellant and Additional Public Prosecutor Shubhi Gupta appeared for the State..[Read Judgment]