More Stories

Informist, Thursday, Feb. 13, 2025

NEW DELHI – Almost three decades after a trial court convicted Vinod Kumar of murdering his neighbour and sentenced him to life imprisonment, the Supreme Court Wednesday acquitted him of all the charges. Kumar, who was booked for murdering his neighbour Dharminder Singh in 1995 on the basis of circumstantial evidence, will now be a free man after languishing in jail.

The apex court said that when Singh's mother was asked why Kumar may have killed her son, she said there was no enmity between the deceased and Kumar, but she suspected Kumar of killing her son as he had taken him from her house. Therefore, even according to the mother, the motive for committing the offence was absent, said the court. This is very relevant as the case is based on circumstantial evidence, the court added.

"There are significant improvements and omissions in the evidence of PW-3 (prosecution witness, the mother). The omissions are so relevant that they become contradictions in view of the explanation to Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973," said the court. Thus, it is very difficult to accept the testimony of the mother as reliable, said the bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan.

Singh's father is not a witness to the theory of last seen together, as he had not seen his son leaving with Kumar, said the court. Therefore, it is not possible to hold that the theory of last seen together was proved by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt, the court added. "Even the findings of the High Court (Delhi), that the appellant gave evasive replies to misguide the parents of the deceased cannot be sustained," said the court. Therefore, two out of five circumstances held as established were not established beyond a reasonable doubt, the court added.

"When the prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence, the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established," said the court. There must be a chain of circumstances so complete as not to leave any ground for any conclusion inconsistent with the innocence of the accused, the court said. In this case, two significant circumstances forming the chain have not been established, the court added.

On Jul. 12, 1995, Kumar went to Singh's residence and asked the latter to accompany him. Kumar said they would return soon. However, Singh never returned home, following which his family questioned Kumar. Initially, Kumar said that Singh had gone to purchase manjha, a thread used for flying kites. Thereafter, Kumar said he had left Singh on the road. But later said that he had left Singh at his residence.

Singh's father then lodged a missing person's report. When police officers reached Kumar's place, they found Kumar and his father missing. Later, Singh's body was found in a bathroom on the terrace of a building. Thereafter, Kumar was charged for murder of Singh on the basis of circumstantial evidence.  End

Reported by Surya Tripathi

Edited by Nishant Maher

For users of real-time market data terminals, Informist news is available exclusively on the NSE Cogencis WorkStation.

Cogencis news is now Informist news. This follows the acquisition of Cogencis Information Services Ltd by NSE Data & Analytics Ltd, a 100% subsidiary of the National Stock Exchange of India Ltd. As a part of the transaction, the news department of Cogencis has been sold to Informist Media Pvt Ltd.

Informist Media Tel +91 (11) 4220-1000

Send comments to feedback@informistmedia.com

© Informist Media Pvt. Ltd. 2025. All rights reserved.