The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Uttar Pradesh government to pay ₹6 lakh in compensation to a man who spent six years in incarceration as an undertrial before being acquitted in a murder case. A bench comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and K Vinod Chandran held the state police accountable for an investigation that the court described as "a classic case of how an investigation should not be proceeded with," noting that the process had significantly jeopardised the man's liberty.
The court’s ruling serves as a stern reminder of the state’s obligation to conduct impartial and thorough inquiries. The bench asserted that six years of an individual's life had been effectively erased due to a "concocted story built on mere surmises and conjectures." By ordering the payment of ₹6 lakh—calculated at roughly ₹1 lakh for each year of imprisonment—the court has demanded accountability from the investigating and prosecuting agencies for their failure to establish even fundamental aspects of the alleged crime.
The legal battle originated from a kidnapping and murder case registered in Agra in October 2019. Notably, the petitioner was neither named in the initial first information report nor mentioned in the primary police statements. He was later implicated based on CCTV footage and a confession attributed to a co-accused. The accused had remained in custody since November 14, 2019, while the prosecution relied entirely on circumstantial evidence that failed to hold up during the judicial process.
Earlier this year, in March, the Supreme Court had intervened during a bail hearing, ordering the trial court to expedite proceedings and conclude the case within three months. Following the subsequent acquittal, the apex court conducted an examination of the evidence provided by the prosecution. The bench discovered a significant catalogue of investigative failures, including the inability of authorities to conclusively identify recovered charred bones or determine the time and cause of death through medical evidence.
Furthermore, the court highlighted that the prosecution examined only six witnesses during the entire trial. The investigation also failed to prove key evidentiary links connecting the petitioner to the alleged crime. Specifically, the CCTV footage presented as evidence was found to be unclear and had not been authenticated in accordance with standard legal procedures. Call detail records also failed to provide the necessary clarity to secure a conviction.
The Supreme Court’s judgment emphasised that the state cannot evade its duty to protect its citizens, stressing that every individual is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. The court stated that the police and the prosecution have a dual responsibility: to ensure justice for victims while simultaneously safeguarding the rights of the accused from unfounded prosecution.
The Uttar Pradesh government has been given a one-month window to facilitate the payment of the compensation. To ensure compliance, the court mandated that any failure to disburse the funds within this stipulated period would result in the amount carrying an 18% annual interest rate. This decision marks a significant judicial effort to provide redress for the systemic failures that led to the man’s extended confinement, highlighting the gravity of procedural negligence within the criminal justice system.
Comments