SUPREME COURT ACQUITS MURDER ACCUSED, SAYS WEAPON RECOVERY AND FSL REPORT ALONE INSUFFICIENT WITHOUT CORROBORATION:

The Supreme Court on Friday (November 14) held that the recovery of a weapon, even when supported by a forensic report, cannot by itself justify a conviction for murder unless it is accompanied by other reliable and corroborative evidence linking the accused to the offence. A bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Vijay Bishnoi set aside the life sentence imposed on a man accused of murder, finding that the High Court had erred in affirming the conviction solely on the basis of the recovery of the alleged firearm and an FSL report connecting the cartridges recovered from the accused with the bullets removed from the deceased’s body.

The case related to an incident that took place on June 12, 2016, around 6 a.m. in village M.P. Majra, Jhajjar (Haryana), when three individuals allegedly arrived in a car and shot the victim. The FIR was lodged by the deceased’s brother after he received information via a phone call to the police control room. During the investigation, the appellant and two co-accused were arrested. A country-made pistol and two live cartridges were claimed to have been seized from the appellant, while the car and another firearm were recovered from a co-accused.

However, at trial, the prosecution’s case significantly weakened. Key witnesses, including PW-1 and PW-5, turned hostile. PW-1, the victim’s brother, stated that he reached the spot only after being informed of the incident and could not identify the assailants. No independent witnesses were produced to support his account or to confirm the presence or identity of the alleged shooters. This left the prosecution without eyewitness testimony, evidence of last seen circumstances, or proof of motive. The only incriminating material that remained was the alleged recovery of the weapon and the corresponding forensic report.

The Supreme Court noted multiple deficiencies surrounding the weapon recovery. The pistol was said to have been found in an unlocked iron box inside the appellant’s home, a place that was easily accessible to other family members. The box also contained other household items, none of which were separately seized or documented, weakening the credibility of the discovery. No independent witness from the neighbourhood was involved in the recovery process, raising doubts about its reliability. The Court also observed that there was an unexplained delay in sending the seized firearm for forensic analysis, further affecting the integrity of the evidence. Relying on principles earlier affirmed in Manjunath v. State of Karnataka (2023), the bench reiterated that recoveries from locations accessible to multiple people are inherently suspect unless supported by strong corroboration.

While the FSL report indicated that the recovered pistol and cartridges matched the bullets found in the deceased, the Court held that such scientific evidence, in the absence of proof that the appellant actually used that weapon, could not establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The alleged motive also primarily related to the co-accused, who were either acquitted or not charge-sheeted, leaving the appellant’s supposed involvement unsupported by credible evidence.

Considering these shortcomings, the Court concluded that the prosecution failed to meet the standard of proof required for a conviction. The life sentence imposed on the appellant was therefore unsustainable. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and acquitted the appellant of all charges.