Representational photo showing a gavel.
Credit: iStock photo
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has set free three men and two women in a 2010 murder case after noting major contradictions in the deposition of the mother of the deceased with regard to the incident.
The appellants accused, Dayalu and others were granted bail by the top court on July 30, 2025.
By then, woman appellants Punimati and Puni Bai remained in jail for over eight years. Male appellants Dayalu, and Gajadhar and Dayanidhi served incarceration for over 15 years and 14 years respectively.
After hearing their appeal argued by advocate Dushyant Parashar, a bench of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and Vipul M Pancholi, this month, set aside the common judgment of 2021 of the Chhattisgarh High Court, which upheld the conviction and sentence of life imprisonment by Raipur court in 2012.
According to the prosecution, on July 14, 2010, the informant, i.e. Parasbai, was informed by her granddaughter Indu Bai, that her son Goreylal, who had gone to take a bath in the pond, were attacked by the accused appellants. She later found that her son had died.
The trial court convicted them and awarded them life imprisonment. The High Court dismissed the appeals.
The bench took into account the deposition of the informant, which revealed that Indu Bai came and told her that accused persons killed Goreylal. She went near to the pond and the accused persons were present there. The accused persons had also tried to assault her.
The court found that there were major contradictions in the deposition given by the informant.
The bench also noted the independent witness has already turned hostile.
The bench pointed out, it was a well-settled law that merely because the witness is an interested or related witness, his or her deposition cannot be discarded. Further, deposition of such witnesses is required to be scrutinised closely.
"As such, we have closely scrutinized the deposition given by the mother of the deceased. There are material contradictions in her deposition regarding the manner in which the incident took place and with regard to which the information about the incident was given by her granddaughter,'' the bench said.
The bench thus held, simply relying upon the deposition given by the mother, the conviction cannot be recorded.
The court further noted, the independent witnesses did not support the case of the prosecution.
The bench said the prosecution has failed to prove the case against the appellants accused persons beyond reasonable doubt, despite which the trial court recorded the judgment and order of conviction and order of sentence, which has been confirmed by the High Court.