Prosecution Case Full of Inconsistencies
The Supreme Court has acquitted Gambhir Singh, who was sentenced to death for the 2012 murder of his brother, sister-in-law, and their four children. The Court criticized the Uttar Pradesh Police for its “utter lackadaisical” investigation, stating that lapses weakened the prosecution’s case and was full of inconsistencies that could not be rectified.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, and Sandeep Mehta ruled that the prosecution failed to establish key incriminating factors, including motive, last-seen evidence, and proper recoveries. The Court held that there was no credible evidence linking Singh to the crime.
Investigation Lacked Credibility
The Court highlighted serious flaws in the investigation. The police did not interview villagers near the crime scene to confirm Singh’s presence. There was no effort to gather proper evidence of motive. The handling of recovered weapons was also flawed, as there was no forensic confirmation of the blood grouping.
The Supreme Court noted that even if the recovery of weapons was considered valid, the forensic report failed to establish their connection to the crime. The Court ruled that these lapses significantly weakened the prosecution’s case.
Case Background
Singh was arrested along with a woman named Gayatri and a minor for the murders of Satyabhan, his wife Pushpa, and their four children on the night of May 8-9, 2012. The trial court acquitted Gayatri in 2017 due to lack of evidence but sentenced Singh to death. The Allahabad High Court later upheld this verdict.
Supreme Court Overturns Conviction
The Supreme Court found multiple inconsistencies in the High Court’s judgment. It ruled that the evidence presented by the prosecution was unreliable and full of gaps. As a result, it set aside Singh’s conviction and death sentence, stating that the case against him could not stand legal scrutiny.
This ruling underscores the importance of thorough and unbiased investigations in serious criminal cases.
