The Supreme Court of India acquitted the appellant, primarily on the ground that the dock identification of the accused by the sole injured eyewitness, recorded via video conferencing after an inordinate delay of over eight years, was deemed unsafe and unreliable. The Court found the testimony suffered from material improvements and inconsistencies, and the recoveries were not conclusively linked to the crime. Consequently, the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Facts Of The Case:
In the intervening night of 2nd/3rd November 2008, five assailants broke into the Delhi residence of Madan Mohan Gulati and his wife, Indra Prabha Gulati (PW-18). The intruders assaulted the elderly couple, resulting in Madan Mohan’s death and serious injuries to Indra Prabha. The police, upon arrival, found the house ransacked and registered an FIR for murder, robbery, and other offences. The investigation led to the arrest of the appellant, Raj Kumar @ Bheema, on 21st November 2008, based on a description allegedly provided by the injured eyewitness. The prosecution’s case rested heavily on PW-18’s subsequent identification of the appellant in court—via video conferencing in May 2017, nearly eight and a half years after the incident—and on alleged recoveries, including a blood-stained pant and a weapon, made at his disclosure. However, the appellant was convicted solely under Section 302 IPC by the trial court, a decision affirmed by the High Court, while his co-accused were acquitted. The Supreme Court, in appeal, scrutinized the reliability of the delayed identification, procedural flaws in the Test Identification Parade, and the lack of forensic connection of the recovered items to the crime.
Procedural History:
The procedural history of this case commenced with the registration of an FIR at Police Station New Friends Colony, Delhi, following the murder of Madan Mohan Gulati and assault on his wife in November 2008. The accused-appellant, Raj Kumar @ Bheema, was arrested later that month. After investigation, a chargesheet was filed, and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, vide judgment dated 12th February 2021, acquitted the appellant of charges under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) and several sections of the IPC, but convicted him under Section 302 IPC for murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The appellant’s criminal appeal was dismissed by the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court on 29th September 2022, which affirmed the trial court’s judgment and sentence. The appellant then approached the Supreme Court by way of Special Leave, which was granted, leading to the present appeal and the ultimate acquittal by the Supreme Court in November 2025.
READ ALSO:Supreme Court: Amicable Settlement Leads to Full Quashing of FIR, Including Dacoity Charge
Court Observation:
The Supreme Court made critical observations leading to the acquittal, primarily focusing on the unreliability of the prosecution’s star evidence. The Court found the dock identification of the accused by the injured eyewitness, recorded via video conferencing after an inordinate delay of over eight years, to be unsafe and improbable. It noted material improvements in her testimony, such as the first-time mention of the accused wearing a black shirt, which were absent in her initial police statement. The Court also held that the sanctity of the Test Identification Parade (TIP) was vitiated, as it was doubtful the witness even participated, and the accused’s refusal to partake could not justify an adverse inference in this flawed context. Furthermore, the Court ruled that the recoveries, including a blood-stained pant, lacked evidentiary value as they were not forensically connected to the crime scene or the victims, and the articles were never identified by a competent witness during trial. Consequently, the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Final Decision & Judgement:
The Supreme Court allowed the criminal appeal and set aside the concurrent judgments of the courts below. The Bench, comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, acquitted the accused-appellant, Raj Kumar @ Bheema, of all charges. The Court held that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, as the sole eyewitness identification after an eight-and-a-half-year delay was unsafe and the recoveries were not conclusively linked to the crime. The judgments of conviction and sentence dated 12th and 20th February 2021 by the trial court, and the affirming order of the Delhi High Court dated 29th September 2022, were hereby quashed. The appellant, who had remained in custody for nearly 15 years, was ordered to be released forthwith if not required in any other case.
Case Details:
Case Title: RAJ KUMAR @ BHEEMA vs. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI Citation: 2025 INSC 1322 Criminal Appeal No.: (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No(s). 697 of 2024) Date of Judgement: November 17, 2025 Judges/Justice Name: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta
Download The Judgement Here