"No Iota of Evidence": Bombay HC Shields 22 Cops in Sohrabuddin Saga, Slams Prosecution's Conspiracy Mirage

In a resounding endorsement of the trial court's 2018 verdict, the Bombay High Court on May 7, 2026, dismissed appeals by Sohrabuddin Shaikh's brothers, upholding the acquittal of 22 accused—including 21 Gujarat and Rajasthan policemen—in the notorious 2005 "fake encounters" involving gangster Sohrabuddin, his wife Kausar Bi, and aide Tulsiram Prajapati. Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad ruled that the CBI's case crumbled under a barrage of hostile witnesses and evidentiary gaps, fortifying the accused's presumption of innocence.

Bus Hijack That Never Was: Unraveling the 20-Year Probe Odyssey

The saga began on November 22, 2005, when Sohrabuddin—a dreaded criminal with cases in Gujarat and Rajasthan—allegedly traveled with Kausar Bi (for medical treatment in Sangli) and Prajapati from Hyderabad in a luxury bus. CBI claimed police in Tata Sumo and Qualis vehicles intercepted it near Zahirabad, abducting the trio. Sohrabuddin was killed on November 26 near Vishala Circle (staged as encounter), Kausar Bi's body reportedly burned and dumped in the Narmada, and Prajapati shot dead in December 2006 while "escaping custody" near Himmatnagar.

Supreme Court orders shifted the probe from Gujarat ATS/CID to CBI in 2010, trials from Ahmedabad to Mumbai in 2012 amid fairness concerns, clubbing four sessions cases. By 2018, after 210 witnesses (92 hostile), the special CBI court acquitted all, discharging others earlier—including Amit Shah in 2014. Brothers Rubabuddin and Nayabuddin appealed, but CBI opted out last year.

Appellants' Plea: "Perverse Verdict Ignored Key Links"

Counsel Gautam Tiwari urged reversal, citing 77 witnesses (including bus passengers, drivers, family) whose prior statements under CrPC Sections 161/164 proved abduction, detention at Disha Farmhouse, and fake encounters. He highlighted medical evidence (no close-range burns on Sohrabuddin), ballistic lapses, Prajapati's "encounter fears" (res gestae under Evidence Act S.6), and motive via marble lobby extortion. Invoking Zahira Habibulla (best bakery bias) and Banne (interference grounds), Tiwari called the acquittal "manifestly erroneous," demanding reappraisal sans S.197 CrPC sanction bar for cops.

Defence Retort: "Politically Charged Witch Hunt, Evidence Mirage"

Senior counsel Amit Desai and others countered: Trial was fair (SC-transferred), no direct evidence or unbroken circumstantial chain ( Hanumant ). Hostile witnesses denied everything; hearsay from criminal antecedents (e.g., PW-5, PW-207) unreliable. No politician-police nexus proved—initial Amit Shah discharge final. Police acted in official duty ( D.T. Virupakshappa ), needing S.197 sanction. Prajapati's "escape" credible; cop injuries genuine, not self-inflicted. Remand impossible—witnesses would flip again.

Court's Scalpel: Hostile Horde, Broken Chains, Sanction Shield

The bench meticulously dissected: Prosecution's abduction foundation failed—no bus witness identified accused or trio; drivers/doctors resiled. Ballistics unlinked weapons; farmhouses unproven. 92 hostiles (key PWs 15,31) yielded nothing in cross. No motive evidence; "nexus" post-facto invention amid 1996 gang rivalries.

Circumstantial case demanded complete chain excluding innocence ( Hanumant )—here, shattered links. Conspiracy? No agreement proof ( Saju , Mirza Akbar ); S.10 Evidence Act inapplicable sans prima facie plot. Hostile testimony usable partially ( Bhajju ), but denials total.

Crucially, 21 cops shielded by S.197 CrPC—no sanction, acts "integrally connected" to duty ( Virupakshappa ). Acquittal not perverse; "two views" favors innocence ( Mallappa ). Political overtones noted: Probe "aligned with narrative to foist liability."

Key Observations

"The trial Judge held that there was no iota of evidence that the prosecution could adduce to prove that any politician was involved in the conspiracy or there was a politician-police nexus..."

"In cases where the evidence is of a circumstantial nature, the circumstances... must be a chain of evidence so far complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused." ( Hanumant citation)

"The presumption of innocence gets concretized when the case ends in acquittal... higher threshold is expected to rebut the same in appeal." ( Mallappa )

A last-minute impleadment bid challenging Shah's discharge was trashed as "oblique motive" by a non-witness surfacing two decades later.

Verdict Echoes: Acquittals Stand, Justice's Presumption Reigns

Appeals dismissed; no retrial. Implications? Bolsters cop protection in encounters ( S.197 sine qua non ), demands ironclad chains for conspiracies. For future fake-encounter claims: Expect scrutiny on witness flips, hearsay, and sanctions. As news reports echoed, CBI's "politically motivated" narrative fizzled—92 hostiles sealed it—reinforcing: Doubt benefits the accused.