Supreme Court acquits two in 1989 murder case; says courts must test evidence carefully when FIR is delayed

The Supreme Court recently acquitted two men who were earlier sentenced to life imprisonment in a 1989 murder case. [Harilal v. State of Chhattisgarh].In a judgment delivered on September 5, a Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra overturned the earlier conviction in the case after noting that the Chhattisgarh High Court had not adequately examined the evidence and witness statements in the case.The Court also took note of the fact that the first information report (FIR) in the case was filed the morning after the murder. The bench emphasised that where there is an unexplained delay in registering the FIR, courts should be more circumspect in analysing the case."The fact that it was a delayed FIR cannot be ignored. When an FIR is delayed, in absence of proper explanation, the courts must be on guard and test the evidence meticulously to rule out possibility of embellishments in the prosecution story, inasmuch as delay gives opportunity for deliberation and guess work. More so, in a case where probability of no one witnessing the incident is high, such as in a case of night occurrence in an open place or a public street," the Court said. .The observations came while allowing appeals filed against a 2010 Chhattisgarh High Court order that had upheld a 1991 trial court conviction of the two persons accused. .The Supreme Court found that the courts below had ignored the fact that there were no clear-cut motives attributable to the accused.Among other factors, the top court also noted that there was no explanation as to why the dead body of the alleged murder victim lay three hundred feet away from the alleged site of the murder, or why a lathi was found beside the corpse. The bench went on to hold that the prosecution had not been able to convincingly prove the genesis of the crime or the circumstances behind the murder. Further, it seemed that the victim had died after being beaten by a mob due to his alleged association with a woman in the village. The Supreme Court ultimately opined that the accused were entitled to the benefit of doubt in the absence of clinching circumstances warranting their conviction..The appeals by the accused men were, therefore, allowed and their convictions were set aside..Supreme Court slams Patna High Court for confirming death penalty to rape and murder accused despite contradictions in witness statements.Senior Advocate DN Goburdhun appeared for the two accused. Additional Advocate General Prachi Mishra represented the State of Chhattisgarh..[Read Judgment]