Incomplete Chain of Circumstantial Evidence & Discredited 'Last Seen' Theory Leads to Acquittal in Double Murder Case: Madhya Pradesh High Court - 2025-10-03

Madhya Pradesh High Court Overturns Death Sentence, Acquits Man in Double Murder of Minors Citing Flawed Investigation and Weak Circumstantial Evidence

Jabalpur, MP – In a significant ruling, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has overturned a trial court's judgment, acquitting Girdhari Sonwane of all charges, including the double murder of two minor girls, for which he was sentenced to death. A division bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Avanindra Kumar Singh set aside the conviction, citing a poorly conducted investigation and the prosecution's failure to establish a complete and unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence.

The High Court also ordered the State to pay Rs. 1,00,000/- in costs to the appellant, with a provision to recover the amount from the investigating officer responsible for the "misguided investigation."

Case Background

The case originated from a judgment by the Special Judge (POCSO Act) in Balaghat, who had convicted Girdhari Sonwane for the kidnapping, sexual assault, and murder of two minor sisters, aged approximately five and three, in April 2022. The trial court had handed down a death sentence for the murder of the younger victim and life imprisonment for the murder of the elder one, along with sentences for other offenses under the IPC and the POCSO Act.

The prosecution's case was built entirely on circumstantial evidence, alleging that Sonwane, a neighbor of the victims, had abducted the girls on his motorcycle, sexually assaulted the younger child, and then drowned them both in a canal.

Defence Arguments: A Chain Full of Holes

Senior Advocate Imtiaz Husain, representing the appellant Girdhari Sonwane, systematically dismantled the prosecution's case by highlighting critical inconsistencies and missing links in the chain of evidence.

Unreliable 'Last Seen' Witness: The testimony of the star witness (PW-10 Omprakash Markam), who claimed to have last seen the victims with the accused, was found to be unreliable. The witness described the motorcycle as "golden," whereas the seized vehicle was "silver." Crucially, despite claiming to have informed the victims' family at 4:00 PM on the day of the disappearance, the accused's name was mysteriously absent from the initial Missing Person Report lodged hours later.

Contradictory Timelines: A major blow to the prosecution's theory was the significant time gap between the "last seen" time (10:30 AM) and the estimated time of death. The postmortem reports placed the time of death between 12 to 18 hours before the examination, suggesting the deaths occurred late in the evening on the day of disappearance—a gap of nearly 11-12 hours, which the court found too long to conclusively point to the accused's guilt.

Lack of Forensic Corroboration: The DNA report failed to support the prosecution's claims. DNA from the victims' bones did not match the mixed DNA profile found on a 'gamchha' (scarf) allegedly belonging to the accused.

Unproven Motive: The prosecution failed to establish a credible motive. Allegations of a property dispute or animosity arising from "black magic" were unsubstantiated, with key witnesses either not being examined or providing hearsay evidence.

Prosecution's Rebuttal Falls Short

The Public Prosecutor, Shri Manas Mani Verma, argued that the memorandum of the accused was corroborated by other evidence. However, the court found the corroborating witnesses to be contradictory and unreliable. For instance, a witness (PW-6) who claimed the accused was arrested from her village was contradicted by the official arrest memo, which stated the arrest took place elsewhere.

High Court's Critical Observations

The High Court meticulously analyzed the evidence and found the prosecution's case wanting on multiple fronts. The bench relied on established Supreme Court precedents regarding circumstantial evidence, including the principles laid down in Bodhraj vs. State of J&K and Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs. State of Maharashtra .

The court highlighted the following pivotal points from the judgment:

"The last seen theory comes into play where the time gap between the point of time when the accused and the deceased were last seen alive and when the deceased is found dead is so small that possibility of any person other than the accused being the author of the crime becomes impossible. In the present case, time-gap is almost of 11-12 hours as per the postmortem reports."

The bench was also critical of the investigation, noting overwriting in witness statements and delays in recording crucial testimony, which brought the "whole investigation under shroud." It concluded that the investigation appeared to be "motivated and malafide."

"It may be true that if the accused involved in the heinous crime go unpunished or are acquitted, a kind of agony and frustration may be caused to the society... however the law does not permit the Courts to punish the accused on the basis of moral conviction or on suspicion alone." - (Quoting a Supreme Court precedent)

Final Verdict and Implications

Finding that the chain of circumstances was incomplete and left reasonable doubt, the High Court allowed the criminal appeals and acquitted Girdhari Sonwane of all charges.

The judgment serves as a stern reminder of the high burden of proof required in cases based on circumstantial evidence. It underscores that suspicion, however strong, cannot replace concrete proof and that a flawed and motivated investigation cannot form the basis of a conviction, especially one that results in a death sentence.