The has acquitted a man previously sentenced to death for the alleged sexual assault of five minors, all aged below 10. According to a Live Law report, the high court overturned the conviction, citing several inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case.
A bench of Justice Anand Venkatesh and Justice KK Ramakrishnan stated that the evidence of the minors suggested that they had been ‘tutored’ before making their statements. “The evidence of all the victims appears to be a parrot-like version in some crucial aspects,” the court said, according to The Indian Express.
The case dates back to February 4, 2024, when the accused allegedly lured the children to his house by offering them mobile phones to play games and promising to buy them snacks. He was accused of repeatedly sexually assaulting the children, leading to his conviction and death sentence by a Special POCSO Court.
The matter reached the as a reference by the State seeking confirmation of the death sentence. The accused had also appealed against his conviction and sentence.
The high court said the prosecution’s case was marked by material contradictions, omissions and other deficiencies, creating reasonable doubt.
The court said that when such doubt remains after a careful examination of the evidence, the accused must receive the benefit of that doubt.
“When reasonable doubt survives a conscientious judicial scrutiny, acquittal is not an act of indulgence; it is the command of the rule of law. Where, after a comprehensive appreciation of the evidence, a reasonable doubt remains regarding the very occurrence alleged and the involvement of the accused, the benefit of such doubt necessarily belongs to the accused. An acquittal in such circumstances is not a failure of justice; rather, it is a consequence of the fundamental principle that no person can be convicted unless the prosecution proves his guilt beyond reasonable doubt,” the court said, according to Live Law.
The bench also examined the statements given by the child victims and their parents and agreed with the defence’s argument that some of the evidence appeared rehearsed or regurgitated.
The court said the similarities in the accounts raised concerns about possible tutoring before the children gave statements to the police and later testified in court.
“The evidence of the victims in this case indicates that the victims were tutored before making their statements to the police as well as before deposing before the court. In view of the above discussion upon the evidence of victims, this Court is of the view that the possibility of suggestive tutoring cannot be ruled out,” the court said.
The court also found discrepancies in the accounts of how the children had gathered at the accused’s house.
The accused had argued that the alleged incident took place during the daytime inside his house, which did not have a door or window and was located in a densely populated residential area.
According to the defence, the children had stated that they screamed during the alleged assault. The accused argued that if this had happened, their cries would have been heard by neighbours, who would likely have come to their aid.
The high court noted that no independent witness had been examined to establish that neighbours heard the children’s cries or attempted to rescue them.
The court also took note of evidence suggesting that some of the children and their parents had previously had arguments with the accused.
The high court also examined the medical evidence produced by the prosecution.
It noted that the medical findings were based largely on the history narrated by the victims and their parents. The doctors had not found any internal or external injuries on the children.
The court said the medical evidence, when considered along with the other deficiencies in the prosecution’s case, did not remove the doubts surrounding the allegations.
The bench also found serious concerns with the manner in which the trial was conducted.
It said the accused had not received a fair and meaningful trial, pointing to the lack of an effective opportunity to consult and instruct his lawyer, the absence of counsel on important occasions, concerns over the effectiveness of cross-examination, procedural irregularities involving the victims and deficiencies in identification.
The court said these issues had prejudiced the accused and affected his fundamental right to a fair trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
“On an overall consideration of the record, this Court is unable to hold that the accused received a fair and meaningful trial. The cumulative effect of the denial of an effective opportunity to consult and instruct counsel, the absence of counsel on material occasions, the inadequacy of the record regarding effective cross-examination, the procedural irregularities concerning the victims, the deficiencies in identification, and the failure to adhere to the safeguards governing capital sentencing has resulted in a fundamental failure of the trial process,” the court was quoted as saying by Live Law.
The high court also criticised the possibility of criminal law being used without sufficient scrutiny, particularly in cases that attract significant public attention.
The court said judges must not allow public pressure or media narratives to influence their assessment of evidence.
“This case stands as a classic textbook illustration of how draconian statutory provisions can be weaponised, holding an innocent person beneath the suspended sword of a death sentence. In an era where trial by media often pronounces guilt long before the judicial process concludes, high-profile cases generate intense public expectation. Courts cannot and must not be guided by popular clamour or media narratives. Yet, intense public scrutiny places an extra duty of care upon the bench to ensure every shred of evidence is exhaustively analysed, leaving no stone unturned,” the court remarked.
