New Delhi, The Supreme Court on Monday acquitted a man of murder charge, saying it was a fit case where the high court and the trial court should have given him the benefit of the doubt.

SC acquits man in 2004 murder case, says courts should have given him benefit of doubt

A bench of Justices Manoj Mishra and Joymalya Bagchi was hearing an appeal filed by Anjani Singh against a July 2019 order of the Allahabad High Court that upheld his conviction by a trial court in Ballia for murder and other penal charges.

According to the FIR, Singh, along with his brother, indiscriminately fired upon a gathering of around 100 people in a village during Durga Puja celebrations on October 20, 2004, after an altercation.

It said two people died on the spot, while several others, including a key prosecution witness, were injured.

The bench said the testimony of the key prosecution witness was not of a stellar quality to form the sole basis of Singh’s conviction, especially when other injured witnesses did not identify him.

“It is difficult to believe how a person with just a country-made pistol, which, ordinarily, is a single-shot weapon, would be able to escape along with two others, who were rendered weaponless against an infuriated crowd of more than 100 people,” the bench said.

It said the pistol could also not be found during the investigation.

Taking note of the testimony of the key witness, the court said it appeared to be a case where several attackers with firearms had opened fire.

“Thus, in any event, the incident did not occur in the manner as alleged by the prosecution, and the prosecution appears not to be coming out with the truth,” the court said.

It underlined that Singh had no motive to kill the deceased persons.

“Taking a conspectus of the entire evidence as also the fact that all eyewitnesses, except prosecution witness 1 , have not supported the prosecution case and have consistently deposed about there being no light at the time of occurrence, in our view, it was a fit case where the benefit of the doubt ought to have been extended to the appellant by the courts below,” the top court said while setting aside the judgment and order convicting him.

It said the appellant stood acquitted of the charges for which he was tried.

This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.