Supreme Court Acquits Death Row Inset Justice
Supreme Court Acquits Man on Death Row, citing Major Contradictions in Prosecution’s Case
Table of Contents
New Delhi: The supreme Court has acquitted a man who was on death row, overturning the judgments of both the trial court and the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The apex court, in a meaningful ruling, highlighted ”material particulars” and “major contradictions” in the prosecution’s evidence, emphasizing that these discrepancies were not minor but rather created a “gaping hole” in the case.
Key Contradictions Undermine Prosecution’s Narrative
The judgment,authored by Justice Nath,meticulously detailed the inconsistencies that led to the acquittal. The court pointed out a significant contradiction in the complainant’s testimony regarding her mother’s whereabouts during the incident. Initially, the complainant stated her mother was in the Gurudwara, but later, in a separate statement, she claimed her mother was hiding due to fear of the appellant.Furthermore, the court noted a crucial change in the description of the weapon allegedly used by the appellant. The complainant initially alleged the appellant was carrying a ‘datar,’ but this was later altered to ‘gandasi.’ These shifts in testimony were deemed by the Supreme Court to be more than mere minor discrepancies, constituting material alterations in the chain of events.
Lack of Independent Corroboration for Recoveries
Adding to the prosecution’s woes, the Supreme Court observed that none of the recoveries made by the investigating agency, specifically the alleged weapon and blood-stained clothes, were corroborated by independent witnesses. This absence of independent corroboration further weakened the prosecution’s case, leaving critical pieces of evidence unsubstantiated.
“Gaping Hole” in Prosecution’s Story
The Supreme Court strongly criticized the lower courts for dismissing these contradictions as “minor.” The bench stated, “In the instant case, there are different versions of the same set of events which are being told by these witnesses at differing points of time, statements retracted and remoulded as per their convenience, wherein such difference in statements are leading to material alterations in the chain of events. As an inevitable result, the prosecution timeline and the basic details about the occurence are not at all corroborated between its two key witnesses. Therefore, we observe that the contradictions in prosecution witnesses’ testimonies, as pointed above, are major ones and carve a gaping hole in the prosecution’s story altogether.”
This strong condemnation underscores the importance of meticulous inquiry and consistent testimony in criminal proceedings,especially in cases involving severe penalties like the death sentence.
Precedent of Faulty Investigation Cited
This acquittal follows a recent instance where the Supreme Court acquitted another death convict,also citing faulty investigation. These rulings highlight a growing concern within the judiciary regarding the quality of investigations and the need for robust, unblemished evidence to secure convictions, particularly in capital punishment cases.
Case Title: BALJINDER KUMAR@KALA v. STATE OF PUNJAB
Citation: 2025 livelaw (SC) 711
Criminal Appeal Nos.: 2688-2689 OF 2024
Appearances:
For Appellant: Senior Advocate Damma Seshadri Naidu
For State of Punjab: Advocate Siddhant Sharma
The Square circle Clinic, NALSAR University of Law, provided legal assistance to the appellant.