Conviction Based on Circumstantial Evidence Set Aside Due to Broken Chain of Custody and Unreliable Identification

The Appellants were convicted by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Dehradun, for the gang rape and murder of a 55-year-old woman

The prosecution alleged that on December 29, 2012, the victim went to the forest to graze goats; two youths (the Appellants) enquired about her whereabouts from witnesses PW-2 and PW-4 before proceeding in her direction

The victim’s body was later found with multiple injuries

Following their arrest on January 3, 2013, the police allegedly recovered a shirt from Mehtab that matched a torn pocket found at the crime scene, and a salwar and ornaments from Sushil

The Trial Court awarded the death penalty, which was confirmed by the High Court of Uttarakhand

The Appellants challenged the conviction based on the failure of the "last seen" theory and the questionable nature of the forensic recoveries

1. Whether the prosecution established a complete chain of circumstantial evidence, specifically regarding the "last seen together" theory and the identity of the accused

2. Whether the forensic evidence and recoveries under Section 27 of the Evidence Act were sufficient and reliable enough to link the Appellants to the crime

The Court applied the foundational principles of circumstantial evidence, requiring a "complete and unbroken chain" pointing unerringly to guilt

Section 302 (Murder) and Section 376(2)(g) (Gang Rape) of the IPC

Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act regarding the "discovery of fact" pursuant to a disclosure statement

Prakash Nishad v. State of Maharashtra regarding the necessity of maintaining a "chain of custody" for forensic samples

Allarakha Habib Memon v. State of Gujarat regarding the insufficiency of blood group matching in isolation

The Court found the "last seen" theory unsustainable because the witnesses (PW-2 and PW-4) did not actually see the Appellants with the victim, but merely traveling in the same direction in a vast forest with multiple access routes

The identification process was deemed flawed as no Test Identification Parade (TIP) was conducted despite the accused being strangers to the witnesses

The court viewed the "match" of the torn shirt pocket as highly suspicious; an expert (PW-11) admitted the pocket appeared carefully unstitched rather than forcibly torn in a struggle

The Court highlighted a terminal breakdown in the "chain of custody," noting that forensic articles were sent to the laboratory with significant unexplained delays (up to 24 days), and the malkhana registers were not produced to prove safe custody

Medical evidence showed that Appellant Mehtab suffered from a condition making sexual intercourse nearly impossible, contradicting the alleged motive

The Court set aside the judgments of the Trial Court and High Court, acquitting the Appellants of all charges; mere suspicion, even in a brutal crime, cannot replace legal proof. The Appellants were ordered to be released from custody immediately