Telangana HC acquits man of murder: incomplete chain of circumstantial evidence, and statements of untested witnesses cannot prove 'last see

Summary

A Division Bench of the Telangana High Court set aside a Jagtial sessions court's life sentence for murder and destruction of evidence. The prosecution had proved a homicidal death but not who caused it. Its key 'last seen together' link rested on statements of two witnesses recorded before a magistrate who were never examined at trial, and the recovery of a towel did not connect the accused to the death.

What the court held

The Court allowed the criminal appeal, set aside the conviction under Sections 302 and 201 IPC and the life sentence, and acquitted the appellant by giving him the benefit of doubt, directing his release unless he is wanted in another case. It held the 'last seen' circumstance was not established once those statements were left out, the recovery of the towel was not linked to the death, and the circumstances taken together did not exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence. The Section 201 conviction also fell because it rested mainly on the same recovery.

Key issues

Can statements recorded under Section 164 CrPC be treated as substantive evidence when the witnesses did not testify at trial?

Was the chain of circumstantial evidence complete under the Sharad Birdhichand Sarda principles?

Can a conviction under Section 201 IPC survive without proof that the accused committed the main offence?

Provisions referred to

Sections 302 and 201, Indian Penal Code

Section 164, Code of Criminal Procedure

Section 27, Indian Evidence Act

Official source: High Court for the State of Telangana. The PDF above is a copy from an open dataset of the court's public records.

This summary is prepared for general assistance only. It may contain errors and is not legal advice — rely on the full judgment.

Related judgments

AP High Court ·28 Sep 2026 ·Police Powers

AP High Court: Police cannot keep a 'suspect sheet' on a person facing a single case without showing habitual offending

A man who had been named in one criminal case asked the High Court to close a suspect sheet the Visakhapatnam police opened against him in 2019. The police said the sheet was meant to curb his alleged unlawful activity near the Steel Plant. The High Court held that this general claim was not enough, because nothing showed he fell within the categories in the Police Standing Orders or was a habitual offender.

Allowed WP/4108/2023

Telangana High Court ·22 Sep 2026 ·Land Law

Telangana HC: State cannot reopen 1960 land assignment decades later without proving it was assigned land

The State appealed against a Single Judge's order quashing a 2020 resumption of about 13 acres in Nizampet village, Medchal-Malkajgiri district, under the Telangana Assignment (Prohibition of Transfers) Act, 1977. A Division Bench of the High Court dismissed three connected writ appeals, holding that the State acted far too late and could not show the land was assigned land with a bar on transfers.

Dismissed WA/781/2026