Supreme Court Acquits Man on Death Row for Seven-year-old girl’s Rape-Murder; says, “No credible evidence”

The Supreme Court (SC) of India overturned the conviction and death sentence of a man, charged in the rape and murder of a seven-year-old girl in Mugalivakkam, Chennai, in 2017, on October 8, 2023, finding there was no credible evidence. The three-judge bench of Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sandeep Mehta, and Justice Sanjay Karol granted the appeal of the accused from the 2018 Madras High Court (HC) order and provided for an immediate release if he was not wanted in another matter. 

In its ruling, the Court stated that the prosecution "miserably failed" to establish the critical circumstances which supported the conviction. The bench rejected the principal piece of evidence, an alleged CCTV footage that purportedly captured the appellant, on the basis that it was never entered into evidence at trial, and characterized the prosecution's reliance on it as tantamount to a fabrication. The court found the so-called last-seen theory to be unbelievable, ruled that the confessional disclosures were unreliable, and held that the FSL/DNA material was not only unreliable but also not properly derived. 

The ruling noted substantial flaws in the investigation and trial, on the scene sketches and mahazars, there was no documentation for significant recoveries, the chain of custody for exhibits was loose, forensic samples were taken too late, and several witnesses were vague or delayed in providing their statements. The bench said it appeared that the investigating officers "tried to screen the truth" and, using language of serious concern, stated that the appellant was made a ‘scapegoat’. Invoking the added burden in circumstantial cases, the Court reiterated that moral outrage is no substitute for legal proof.

The appellant received legal aid from a clinic affiliated with NALSAR, was found not guilty, and was ordered to be released immediately. The judgment raises systemic issues about evidence management and police investigation practices and is likely to lead to renewed scrutiny of our forensic practices, evidence sovereignty, and trials in serious crime.