Breaking SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMS PUBLIC DOMAIN PROTECTION FOR DIGITAL LAWS
New Delhi · Sunday, 13 September 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law - free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2026-05-27 allowed

Mehtab vs State of Uttarakhand vs. State of Uttarakhand

Bench: 3 — Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, Vijay Bishnoi

In Brief

Two men, Mehtab and Sushil, were convicted and sentenced to death for raping and murdering a 55-year-old Scheduled Caste woman in Uttarakhand in 2012. The case relied entirely on circumstantial evidence: witnesses claiming they saw two men asking about the victim before her death, recovery of her ornaments following the accused's confession, and a torn pocket from the crime scene matching the accused's shirt. The Supreme Court acquitted both men, finding the "last seen together" evidence weak and uncorroborated, the recovered items were from publicly accessible areas without proper witness procedures, and crucial forensic evidence had unexplained custody delays and chain-of-custody gaps. The Court held that brutal crime severity cannot substitute legal proof, and circumstantial evidence must form an unbroken chain excluding innocence.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Criminal Procedure Circumstantial Evidence Chain of Custody Forensic Evidence Eyewitness Identification Test Identification Parade Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act Sexual Assault Murder Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login