SUPREME COURT QUASHES DOWRY CASE AGAINST IN-LAWS OVER VAGUE ALLEGATIONS AND DELAY
March 31, 2026SUPREME COURT ACQUITS ACCUSED IN 2004 FIRING CASE DUE TO LACK OF RELIABLE EVIDENCE
Name of the Court: Supreme Court of India
The case concerns Criminal Appeal No. 591 of 2020, decided by the Supreme Court of India on 5 January 2026, arising from a judgment of the Allahabad High Court.
The appellant, Anjani Singh, along with two others—Ravindra Singh and Rishabh Dev Singh—was tried for offences under Sections 302 (murder), 307 (attempt to murder), and 504 IPC. The Trial Court convicted all three accused. On appeal, the High Court acquitted Rishabh Dev Singh but upheld the conviction of Anjani Singh and Ravindra Singh. During the pendency of the Supreme Court appeal, Ravindra Singh died, leaving Anjani as the sole appellant.
Prosecution Case
The incident occurred on 20 October 2004 during a village function involving a drama performance. A minor altercation began when Anjani allegedly assaulted the informant’s young son. Later that evening, Anjani, Ravindra (armed with a rifle), and Rishabh (with a lathi) allegedly returned and opened fire on the informant (PW-1) and others. Two persons died on the spot, and several others sustained firearm injuries. An FIR was promptly lodged, and investigation followed, including seizure of a broken rifle and forensic collection of evidence.
Evidence and Trial Issues
The prosecution relied heavily on eyewitness testimony, especially that of PW-1 (informant). However, most other eyewitnesses either turned hostile or stated that there was darkness at the time of the incident, as the generator lights had gone off. This significantly weakened the prosecution’s case regarding identification of the accused.
Medical evidence confirmed firearm injuries and deaths caused by close-range gunshots. However, inconsistencies arose regarding the recovery and forensic linkage of the weapon. The rifle allegedly used did not match with the recovered magazine and cartridge, raising doubts about the prosecution’s version.
Supreme Court’s Analysis
The Court critically evaluated whether PW-1’s testimony alone could sustain conviction. It found several issues:
- PW-1’s statements were inconsistent and contradictory, particularly regarding the location and manner of firing.
- Other injured witnesses did not support the prosecution and confirmed lack of visibility due to darkness.
- The role of Anjani Singh was not clearly established, especially regarding specific acts of firing.
- The forensic evidence did not conclusively connect the accused with the weapons used.
- The prosecution failed to explain why two unrelated persons were killed, despite the alleged motive being directed only at PW-1.
- There were indications that multiple assailants or weapons may have been involved, contrary to the prosecution story.
The Court emphasized that conviction based on a single eyewitness requires high reliability, which was lacking in this case.
Judgment
The Supreme Court held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. It concluded that the evidence was insufficient, unreliable, and inconsistent. Consequently, the Court granted the benefit of doubt to Anjani Singh, set aside his conviction, and acquitted him of all charges.
