Supreme Court Acquits Putai & Dileep in Child Rape-Murder Case Over Grave Investigative Lapses

The Supreme Court of India has acquitted two men, Putai and Dileep, who had been convicted for the rape and murder of a 12-year-old girl in September 2012, after finding serious flaws in the investigation and prosecution’s case.

Putai had been sentenced to death and Dileep to rigorous life imprisonment by the trial court, with the Allahabad High Court affirming those convictions. On appeal, however, the Supreme Court found that the matter rested entirely on circumstantial evidence and that the prosecution had failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

On the Circumstantial Evidence Standard, the Supree Court reiterated that conviction is possible only where the chain of incriminating circumstances points exclusively to the accused. In this case, the evidence fell short.

Regarding the Unreliable Recovery of Articles, the Court held that the recovery of the victim’s belongings from Putai’s field could not be relied upon. The land was open and accessible, and the omission of key items such as the underwear from the initial complaint suggested the possibility of a planted recovery.

The Apex Court also dismissed arguments based on alleged "Suspicious Conduct" observing that behaviour such as washing hands or failing to inquire about the victim was either natural, exaggerated, or explainable in light of the accused’s alibi.

The Dog Squad Evidence was also found to be wholly unreliable by the Supreme Court as the contradictions in witness testimony regarding the colour of the comb, doubts about whether an ordinary comb could be identified with certainty, and the lack of official documentation undermined the credibility of this evidence.

Similarly, the Apex Court identified Grave Lapses in DNA Evidence, noting the unproven procedures for blood sample collection, the contradictions in expert testimony, and the production of a supplementary DNA report without giving the accused a chance to contest it under Section 313 CrPC (Section 351 BNSS) and that Section 293 of CrPC (Section 329 of BNSS, 202322) makes it amply clear that only evidence of formal nature can be given on affidavits..

Thus, the Supreme Court criticized the investigation and called it a “Shabby Investigation”, by highlighting the failures such as not sending crucial articles for forensic testing, conducting only limited searches of the accused’s homes, and failing to examine neighbours who might have witnessed relevant facts.

In view of these deficiencies, the three Judge Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, and Sandeep Mehta concluded that the prosecution had not proved its case, and both the convictions were set aside, and Putai and Dileep were ordered to be released.

Coram: Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Sandeep Mehta.