Patna: The Patna High Court has acquitted Pradeep Mahto in the Sukho Sada murder case, setting aside his conviction and sentence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
A division bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh and Justice Anshul delivered the verdict after examining the prosecution’s case, witness statements and the circumstances surrounding the investigation.
The court found serious doubts in the prosecution’s evidence and concluded that the circumstances, considered together, warranted giving Mahto the benefit of the doubt.
Eyewitness Statements Weaken Prosecution’s Case
According to the prosecution, Pradeep Mahto shot and killed Sukho Sada near a palm tree following a dispute.
However, the court found that the statements of witnesses identified as eyewitnesses did not adequately establish that they had directly witnessed the incident.
The testimonies of Sattan Sada, Ashok Sada and Etwari Sada did not confirm the prosecution’s claim that they had seen the killing. The claim of informant Pawan Sada that he was an eyewitness was also not sufficiently supported by other evidence, according to the report of the judgment.
These discrepancies weakened the prosecution’s account of how the murder took place.
Court Raises Questions Over FIR Timing
The timing of the First Information Report (FIR) was another significant concern examined by the bench.
The FIR was reportedly registered at 11 pm, while the inquest report prepared at 5.45 pm on the same day already mentioned the FIR number.
The court also considered the delay in the FIR reaching the magistrate, treating it as part of the wider set of circumstances that raised doubts about the prosecution’s case.
The bench observed that these issues could not be dismissed as isolated technical irregularities and had to be assessed collectively alongside the other evidence.
Victim’s Wife Not Examined as Prosecution Witness
The court also noted that the deceased’s wife, Khakhari Devi, had reached the spot after receiving information about the incident and that police had recorded her statement.
However, she was not presented as a prosecution witness, and her formal statement was not brought on record, according to the report.
The omission was considered among the circumstances relevant to the court’s assessment of the investigation and the evidence presented during the trial.
Benefit of Doubt Leads to Acquittal
After examining the eyewitness accounts, the FIR timeline, the inquest report and other circumstances, the division bench found that the prosecution’s case was affected by serious doubts.
Holding that the evidence did not sufficiently establish the prosecution’s account, the court extended the benefit of doubt to Pradeep Mahto and acquitted him.
The verdict set aside his conviction and sentence under IPC Section 302 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
