The Supreme Court has set aside the conviction of Sahab Singh alias Sat Pal in a 2007 case concerning the death of a six-year-old child in Ambala, holding that the prosecution failed to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt.
A Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar and Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva allowed the criminal appeal on September 2, 2026, and set aside both the Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment and the trial court's conviction. The Court extended the benefit of doubt to the appellant and reaffirmed its direction that he be released forthwith, unless his custody was required in another case.
Background of the Case
The case arose from FIR No. 70 of 2007 registered at Baldev Nagar Police Station in Ambala. The prosecution alleged that the child went missing on March 11, 2007, and his body was found the following morning in a village well. The post-mortem report attributed the death to asphyxia caused by smothering and a cervical spinal injury.
There was no direct evidence against Sahab Singh. The prosecution relied on circumstances, particularly the claim that he was the last person seen with the child, an alleged confession before the village Sarpanch, recoveries and forensic evidence.
The trial court convicted him under Sections 302, 201 and 377 of the IPC and imposed life imprisonment for the Section 302 charge, along with other sentences. The High Court later upheld the conviction. By the time the Supreme Court considered the appeal, the appellant had spent more than 16 years and seven months in custody.
Supreme Court's Observations
The Supreme Court closely examined the evidence concerning the alleged “last seen” circumstance. It found that the prosecution witnesses did not clearly establish that the child was accompanying the appellant at the relevant time.
The Court also questioned the significance of an open packet of namkeen recovered from the spot. The evidence showed that the same brand was commonly available in the village, while there was no evidence connecting the recovered packet with the packet allegedly purchased by the appellant.
The alleged disclosure statement also failed to provide a fresh link. The Court noted that the body had already been recovered on March 12, whereas the disclosure statement was recorded on March 14. The places allegedly identified by the appellant were already known to the police.
“In the present case no new fact is discovered. As per the prosecution the accused is alleged to have identified the spots, which as noticed above were already in the knowledge of the prosecution.”
The Court further found material discrepancies concerning the alleged extra-judicial confession before the Sarpanch and held that such evidence required reliable independent support.
On the forensic evidence, the Court noted that semen was detected on the relevant clothing and rectal swab, but no DNA examination was conducted to establish that the samples came from the same source. It held that the prosecution could not shift the burden onto the accused without first establishing that link.
Decision
The Supreme Court concluded that several important links in the prosecution case remained unproved. It held that the prosecution had not established the appellant's connection with the victim, his presence with the victim at the relevant time, or his connection with the place of incident beyond reasonable doubt.
The Court therefore set aside the High Court judgment dated October 18, 2022, as well as the trial court's judgment of conviction and order on sentence.
The appeal was allowed by extending the benefit of doubt to Sahab Singh alias Sat Pal, with his release from prison reaffirmed unless his continued incarceration was required in another case.
-300x169.webp)
