Allahabad High Court acquits man in wife and 2 sons' murder case, cites no motive
The Allahabad High Court has acquitted a man who had been convicted of murdering his wife and two sons in Mathura in 2017, saying that
The Allahabad High Court has acquitted a man who had been convicted of murdering his wife and two sons in Mathura in 2017, saying that in cases based entirely on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a reasonable and convincing motive. The court said it would be unsafe to convict an accused in the absence of a credible and compelling motive. Read Full Story Allowing the appeal filed by Babu, a bench of Justices J J Munir and Sanjiv Kumar ordered that he be released from jail forthwith. The court said that where a case rests wholly on circumstantial evidence, it is always safe to examine whether the alleged assailant had a reasonable motive to commit the crime.
According to the case records, an FIR was lodged on September 3, 2017, by the appellant's aunt, who said that when she went to his house in the morning, she found the bodies of his wife and two sons. The man was not there, and all three had been killed with a sharp object. The appellant was arrested in Delhi the same day. At the time of his arrest, he was wearing a blood-stained shirt. On January 27, 2022, a trial court in Mathura convicted him and sentenced him to life imprisonment, after which the present appeal was filed.
While the police claimed that the murder weapon had been recovered, the High Court noted that no independent witness testified that the appellant had disclosed the place where he had kept the weapon. "In our considered opinion, therefore, this incriminating circumstance of recovery of the weapon of murder at the pointing out of the appellant has to be discarded," the court said in its July 13 order. The bench also said, "Here, the testimony, that has been offered by the prosecution, does not attribute any motive to the appellant to commit such a gruesome crime.
There is some mention of a motive in the statement of the appellant recorded by the Police under Section 161 Cr.P.C., but no evidence thereof could be produced in court by the prosecution." Summing up its view, the court said that without a potent motive and with the recovery evidence discarded, it would be unsafe to sustain a conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence. Ends
The BriefWire