Telangana HC Acquits Man Serving Life Sentence Since 2018 In Nizamabad Murder Case

The court allowed a criminal appeal filed by Mangilal and set aside the judgment of the Sessions Court, Nizamabad, which had convicted him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to life imprisonment on April 4, 2018.

According to the prosecution, the deceased and her husband, both physically challenged and engaged in a pani puri business, had brought Mangilal from Rajasthan to assist them in their work. The prosecution alleged that Mangilal attempted to sexually exploit the woman and, when she resisted and threatened to complain to her husband, fatally assaulted her with a pestle. The trial court convicted the accused by relying on the confession of accused before panch witness and recovery of the pestle and a knife.

The High Court found that the prosecution case rested on circumstantial evidence and that it had failed to establish a complete chain of circumstances linking the accused to the crime. The bench noted that there were no eyewitnesses to the incident and pointed out that prosecution failed to prove that blood detected on the pestle belonged to the accused. Moreover, finger prints were not collected from the pestle and the knife. The knife was not sent for examination to the Forensic Science Laboratory.

The court observed discrepancies relating to material objects, including the description of clothing, while forensic evidence did not conclusively establish that the blood found on the alleged weapon was connected to the accused. The court considered that the accused remained at the scene after the incident and assisted in shifting the victim to a hospital, conduct that the court found inconsistent with the prosecution's theory.

The court cited settled legal principles governing criminal trials and observed that even in grave offences, the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It held that when two views were possible on the evidence available, the one favourable to the accused must prevail. Holding that the prosecution had failed to discharge its burden of proof, the High Court acquitted Mangilal.