State of U.P. v. Raghunandan @ Bade Mali & Ors.
Background
Six men were alleged to have ambushed and shot dead one Raghunandan Singh at a crossing in Etah district, U.P. in 2001 while he was returning from a market, and to have taken away his licensed rifle. The Trial Court convicted all six, but the Allahabad High Court later acquitted four of them (including the man coincidentally also named "Raghunandan @ Bade Mali," a different person from the deceased) while upholding the conviction of two accused, Shiv Singh and Ram Niwas. The State appealed the acquittals (Appeal No.1189/2008), while the two convicted men appealed their convictions (Appeal No.1204/2008); both appeals were heard together.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that although there were minor inconsistencies between the two eyewitnesses, these did not go to the core of the case, and the recovery of country-made pistols from Shiv Singh and Ram Niwas, matched by ballistic evidence to cartridges found at the scene, firmly established their guilt. However, since the recovery of the deceased's own licensed rifle from the acquitted accused's house was not satisfactorily proved, and that rifle was never shown to have been used, the Court agreed with the High Court that the other four accused may have been falsely over-implicated. It therefore affirmed the High Court's acquittal of the four accused and affirmed the conviction and life sentence of Shiv Singh and Ram Niwas, dismissing both appeals and cancelling the bail of the two convicted men.
Lesson Learnt
In cases with multiple accused, appellate courts can uphold conviction of some accused while acquitting others on the same facts, based on which specific recoveries and forensic evidence (like ballistic matching) are reliably linked to each individual: group accusations are not automatically all-or-nothing.