Supreme Court Acquits Four in 2009 Murder Case Citing Unreliable Witness Testimonies

In a significant judgment delivered on 27th March 2025, the Supreme Court of India acquitted four men convicted for a 2009 murder case, highlighting glaring inconsistencies in witness testimonies and investigation lapses. The case of Arun & Ors. vs. State of Madhya Pradesh involved the murder of Mohan Singh in Indore district, where the appellants had been sentenced to life imprisonment by lower courts. The apex court’s detailed analysis of witness credibility and forensic evidence provides crucial insights into criminal jurisprudence standards.

Case Background

Mohan Singh was killed on 6th November 2009 in Kishanpura Ganj, Indore. The prosecution alleged that five men – Arun, Radheshyam, Narendra, Abhay Singh and Ramlal – attacked Mohan Singh with stones and firearms following a land dispute. While the trial court convicted all five in 2013, the High Court acquitted Abhay Singh in 2024 but upheld the convictions of the other four.

Key Issues Before the Supreme Court

1. Reliability of eyewitness accounts from family members
2. Discrepancies between FIR version and court testimonies
3. Forensic contradictions regarding cause of death
4. Delay in recording witness statements
5. Credibility of child witness testimony

Court’s Critical Observations

The bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna, Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan identified multiple flaws in the prosecution’s case:

1. Contradictory Witness Accounts

“Devisingh’s version before the Trial Court was, therefore, entirely different from what he had originally stated and was recorded in the F.I.R.”

The Court noted that while the FIR mentioned only seeing Ramlal and one unidentified person fleeing, the trial testimonies suddenly implicated all five accused with specific roles.

2. Timeline Impossibilities

“Juxtaposing the versions of Vijay Dongre (PW-5) and Abhay (PW-11), it is clear that Mohan Singh and Abhay could not have been at the spot where the attack took place by 06:30 pm.”

The Court meticulously reconstructed the timeline showing the alleged attack couldn’t have occurred when witnesses claimed.

3. Investigation Lapses

“D.S. Parmar, the Investigating Officer (PW-20), admitted that Abhay’s statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded only on 23.11.2009, that is, 17 days after the incident.”

The delayed recording of crucial witness statements raised serious doubts about their authenticity.

4. Forensic Contradictions

“Dr. L.S. Verma (PW-2) candidly admitted to the effect that what was initially stated by him to be a gunshot wound was actually caused by a stabbing weapon.”

This fundamentally undermined the prosecution’s theory about the murder weapon.

Legal Principles Invoked

• The Court clarified that while the maxim ‘Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus’ isn’t absolute law in India, inconsistent testimonies must be viewed with caution
• Emphasized the prosecution’s burden to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
• Highlighted the importance of prompt recording of witness statements

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court:

1. Allowed the appeals and set aside the High Court’s judgment
2. Acquitted all four appellants of all charges
3. Ordered immediate release of Ramlal who was still in custody
4. Directed refund of any fines paid by the appellants

Significance of the Judgment

This judgment serves as an important reminder about:

• The dangers of relying solely on interested witness testimonies
• The need for prompt and thorough investigations
• The courts’ duty to scrutinize prosecution evidence meticulously
• The constitutional principle of ‘benefit of doubt’ favoring the accused

The decision brings closure to a 16-year legal battle, while reinforcing fundamental criminal justice principles.

Petitioner Name: Arun & Ors..
Respondent Name: State of Madhya Pradesh.
Judgment By: Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar, Justice K.V. Viswanathan.
Place Of Incident: Kishanpura Ganj, Indore.
Judgment Date: 26-03-2025.

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

Download Judgment: arun-&-ors.-vs-state-of-madhya-prad-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-26-03-2025.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Murder Cases
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Attempt to Murder Cases
See all petitions in Custodial Deaths and Police Misconduct
See all petitions in SC/ST Act Case
See all petitions in Judgment by Sanjiv Khanna
See all petitions in Judgment by Sanjay Kumar
See all petitions in Judgment by K.V. Viswanathan
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments March 2025
See all petitions in 2025 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