Back
Bombay HC Shuts Door on Sohrabuddin Fake Encounter Saga: Acquittals Upheld, Amit Shah Plea Dismissed
In a resounding verdict that closes a nearly two-decade chapter of controversy, the has upheld the trial court's acquittal of 22 accused policemen in the high-profile Sohrabuddin Shaikh fake encounter case. Brothers Rubabuddin Shaikh and Nayabuddin Shaikh, appellants challenging the acquittal, saw their pleas dismissed, with the bench slamming the prosecution's case as riddled with evidentiary gaps. Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad also rejected an impleadment bid to revisit Union Home Minister Amit Shah's discharge, terming it "oblique" and possibly from a "political adversary."
The Shadow of 2005: Abductions, Encounters, and Endless Probes
The saga began on , when Gujarat's shot dead Sohrabuddin Shaikh near Ahmedabad, labeling it an encounter with a operative. His wife Kausar Bi vanished, her remains allegedly burned and dumped in the Narmada River. Associate Tulsiram Prajapati met a similar fate in a "encounter" near Udaipur. Initial probes by gave way to orders transferring investigation to in , with trials shifted to Mumbai amid bias fears.
Sessions Cases 177/2013, 178/2013, 577/2013, and 312/ saw charge 38, but 13 were discharged, three charges dropped, and 22 acquitted after a marathon trial with 210 witnesses—92 turning hostile. Appellants, Sohrabuddin's brothers, cried foul over the trial judge's " " findings.
Prosecution's Tower of Babel vs. Defence's Ironclad Wall
Appellants' counsel urged reappreciation of evidence from 77 witnesses, including bus passengers spotting a burka-clad woman and two men near Zahirabad, doctors noting close-range wounds sans burn marks, and jailmates claiming Tulsiram's fears of elimination. He invoked precedents like for interference in acquittals and stressed parts under .
Defence, led by senior advocate , countered that the trial judge meticulously dissected each testimony, finding no unbroken circumstantial chain proving abduction, detention at Disha Farmhouse, or conspiracy. Key witnesses like PW-2, PW-3 (bus passengers), PW-15, PW-31 (eyewitnesses to Vishala Circle) resiled completely. Ballistics failed to link firearms, and accused No.25's non-self-inflicted wound debunked fakeness. They highlighted public servants' shield absent sanction, no politician-police nexus, and political motivation in the probe.
Dissecting the Mirage: No Nexus, Broken Chains, Sanction Shield
The bench meticulously traced the prosecution's narrative—from alleged Hyderabad bus interception to farmhouses and staged shootouts—but found it crumbling. Medical evidence confirmed firearm deaths but no close-range hallmarks or ruling out stress-free encounters. Crucially, demanded a " " excluding innocence hypotheses; here, links snapped: no eyewitnesses identified accused, tampered Hyderabad mess logs, unlinked weapons.
Quoting trial judge:
"Prosecution has though tried but has failed to prove any such politician police nexus."
Public servants (20 of 22 accused) got Section 197 cover per
, as acts purported official duty. Hostile witnesses' prior statements? Inadmissible substantively, per
. No
or
for Tulsiram's alleged fears.
Precedents like and limited appellate interference to perversity—absent here. The court noted 16 unchallenged discharges mirroring the same evidence.
Pearls from the Bench: Echoes of Judicial Restraint
-
"The prosecution failed to establish that the seized fire-arms were used in the encounter... there is also failure of investigation."
-
"If the act is done under the
, in
, then also for prosecuting the public servant, sanction is must."
-
"In cases where the evidence is of a circumstantial nature, the circumstances... must be such as to exclude every hypothesis but the one proposed to be proved."
-
On Shah plea:
"Interim Application... has been filed with an
and at the instance of some political adversary."
Verdict's Final Stroke: Justice Served, Shadows Lifted
"Criminal Appeal Nos.641 and 656 of 2019 are dismissed."
The
judgment reinforces acquittal's sanctity, demanding ironclad proof in fake encounter claims. Practical fallout: Bolsters police immunity under official duty, cautions against circumstantial overreach. As news reports note, Shah's discharge—challenged post-arrest and bail in
—stands firm amid political crossfire.
This ruling, born of transfers for fairness, signals probes must transcend narratives, letting evidence alone speak.
