Court Finds Insufficient Evidence; Last Seen Theory Deemed Inadequate for Conviction
In a significant judgment dated February 6, 2026, the Allahabad High Court acquitted Anoop Singh and Ram Kumar, the remaining appellants in the 1992 murder case of Chandrapal, citing insufficient evidence. The court emphasized that the prosecution failed to establish a complete and unbroken chain of circumstances necessary for a conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence.
The case, which has been ongoing for over three decades, revolved around the murder of Chandrapal, whose body was discovered near Ballabhgarh railway station. The prosecution relied heavily on the "last seen theory," claiming that Chandrapal was last seen with the accused, Anoop Singh and Ram Kumar, before his death. However, the court noted a significant time gap between the last sighting and the discovery of the body, which weakened the prosecution's case.
The Division Bench, comprising Justices Siddharth and Jai Krishna Upadhyay, highlighted that the circumstantial evidence presented was insufficient to exclude every hypothesis except the guilt of the accused. The judgment reiterated that for a conviction based on circumstantial evidence, the chain of circumstances must be complete and conclusive, leaving no room for alternative explanations.
Furthermore, the court pointed out inconsistencies in the prosecution's evidence, including doubts about the handwriting on a slip allegedly written by the accused and the lack of corroborative evidence to support the last seen theory. The court also considered the possibility of other individuals' involvement during the time gap between the last sighting and the discovery of the body.
The judgment reflects a broader legal principle that suspicion cannot replace proof in criminal trials. The court stated that when two views are possible, the one favoring the accused must be adopted, especially when the prosecution fails to elevate its case from "may be true" to "must be true."
In light of these findings, the court extended the benefit of doubt to the accused, setting aside the trial court's conviction and ordering their release. This judgment underscores the importance of a thorough and conclusive presentation of evidence in cases reliant on circumstantial evidence.
Bottom Line:
Circumstantial evidence - Last seen theory cannot alone be sufficient for conviction in absence of strict proximity of time and place between last sighting and death of deceased.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 364, 302/34, Criminal Procedure Code Sections 161, 313, 82, 83
Balak Ram v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2849964
