CBI Ordered to Review SIT Report: Supreme Court Ruling on Triple Murder Case in Uttar Pradesh

The Supreme Court of India recently delivered an important judgment in the case of Smt. Sunita Devi & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., addressing the need for a fair investigation into a triple murder case that took place in Uttar Pradesh in 2001. The Court directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to review the findings of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) report and decide on further action. This ruling underscores the importance of a thorough and unbiased investigation, particularly in cases where previous inquiries have been found inadequate.

Background of the Case

The case revolves around the murder of Seema Garg (daughter-in-law of petitioner Sunita Devi) and her two children on July 24, 2001. The incident was reported in FIR No. 221 of 2001 at Police Station Pilakhwa, District Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, under Sections 302 and 394 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). During the trial, Seema Garg’s husband, Nitin Garg, who was also a prime suspect in the case, was murdered. This led to a second case (FIR No. 228 of 2002) being filed.

The trial court, in its judgment dated October 16, 2004, acquitted the accused, namely Manveer alias Mintoo and Mukesh, citing lack of evidence and improper investigation. The court noted serious lapses in the investigation, raising concerns that the real culprits had not been brought to justice.

Legal Proceedings Leading to the Supreme Court

Petition for Re-investigation

The petitioners approached the Supreme Court, arguing that the investigation had been flawed from the beginning. They sought a court-monitored investigation or the formation of an SIT to reinvestigate both FIR No. 221 of 2001 (Seema Garg’s murder) and FIR No. 228 of 2002 (Nitin Garg’s murder). On February 8, 2018, the Supreme Court declined to order a reinvestigation of FIR No. 228 of 2002 but directed the constitution of an SIT to re-investigate FIR No. 221 of 2001.

Formation of SIT

The Supreme Court appointed M.L. Sharma, retired IPS officer and former Special Director of the CBI, as the chairman of the SIT. He was permitted to select two officers of his choice from the CBI to assist in the investigation. The Uttar Pradesh government was directed to provide all necessary logistical and financial support to the SIT.

Key Findings of the SIT

The SIT completed its investigation and submitted its report on February 8, 2018. The main findings were:

Accused Involvement: Manveer and Mukesh were responsible for the murder of Seema Garg and her two children. The murders were committed at the behest of Nitin Garg, who conspired with the accused to eliminate his wife.
Last Seen Evidence: Witnesses Sanjay Sharma and Sonu Tomar (now deceased) stated that Manveer was last seen at Seema Garg’s residence between 4:30 and 5:00 p.m. on the day of the murders.
Post-Crime Behavior: Manveer disappeared from Pilakhwa between July 24-30, 2001, while Mukesh fled to Shyamli village and was later arrested in Moradabad.
Forensic Evidence: Blood-stained clothes and weapons were recovered based on the confessions of Manveer and Mukesh. Laboratory tests confirmed the presence of human blood on these items.
Polygraph and Psychological Assessments: Manveer exhibited deceptive responses during a polygraph test, indicating his involvement in the crime. Mukesh could not undergo the test due to medical reasons but was found to be deceptive in forensic psychological assessments.
Motive: Seema Garg’s father-in-law received a letter on July 8, 2001, from Sunil Bansal, warning that Nitin Garg and his family suspected Seema of infidelity and that she feared for her life.

Arguments by the Petitioners

The petitioners, represented by advocate Kamini Jaiswal, raised concerns about the SIT’s approach, arguing:

The SIT failed to investigate the truthfulness of statements made by key witnesses, including Head Constable Chander Pal.
The SIT did not thoroughly examine alternative theories suggested by the petitioners.
The SIT acknowledged that Nitin Garg’s murder in 2002 was likely a contract killing, but did not recommend further investigation into that case.

Supreme Court’s Observations and Ruling

The Supreme Court, after reviewing the SIT report and the petitioners’ objections, concluded that the matter required further scrutiny by the CBI. The Court held:

“We are of the view that the CBI has to look into the report of the SIT and take a decision in the matter.”

Accordingly, the Court ordered:

The CBI to review the SIT’s findings and determine further course of action.
That the writ petition be disposed of in these terms.

Key Takeaways from the Judgment

Judicial Oversight in Investigations: The Supreme Court’s intervention underscores the judiciary’s role in ensuring that criminal investigations are thorough and impartial.
Importance of Reinvestigation: The case highlights the significance of re-examining cases where the initial investigation has been found inadequate or biased.
CBI’s Role: By directing the CBI to take charge, the Court ensured that a central investigative agency would handle the case, reducing potential local influences.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision in this case is a crucial step towards justice for Seema Garg and her children. The ruling ensures that no stone is left unturned in investigating serious crimes, especially where initial inquiries have been inadequate. By directing the CBI to review the SIT report, the Court has reinforced the principle that criminal cases must be pursued diligently, without bias or external influence.

Petitioner Name: Smt. Sunita Devi & Anr..
Respondent Name: Union of India & Ors..
Judgment By: Justice A.K. Sikri, Justice S. Abdul Nazeer.
Place Of Incident: Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh.
Judgment Date: 20-02-2019.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Smt. Sunita Devi & A vs Union of India & Ors Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 20-02-2019.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Murder Cases
See all petitions in Custodial Deaths and Police Misconduct
See all petitions in Juvenile Justice
See all petitions in Judgment by A.K. Sikri
See all petitions in Judgment by S. Abdul Nazeer
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Remanded
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments February 2019
See all petitions in 2019 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category