The High Court of Jammu Kashmir and Ladakh has partly allowed a criminal appeal in the 2014 RS Pura murder case, acquitting three of the four convicted persons while upholding the life sentence of the principal accused, Deepak Singh.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar delivered the judgment on April 23, 2026, in Criminal Appeal (D) No. 04/2024 c/w Criminal Reference No. 05/2024, arising out of FIR No. 132/2014 of Police Station RS Pura.
The appeal challenged the January 24, 2024 judgment of the trial court, which had convicted all four accused, Deepak Singh, Shammi Singh, Manjeet Singh, and Charanjeet Singh, under Sections 302, 452, 34 RPC and relevant provisions of the Arms Act, sentencing them to life imprisonment.
The High Court held that the prosecution failed to establish the involvement of Shammi Singh, Manjeet Singh, and Charanjeet Singh beyond reasonable doubt, citing inconsistencies, lack of corroboration, and procedural lapses.
“The testimonies of PW-1 Anil Sharma, PW-2 Kishore Sharma, and PW-3 Vijay Kumar do not inspire confidence and appear fraught with material inconsistencies and improbabilities,” the Court observed.
It noted that the prosecution’s case relied heavily on these eyewitnesses, whose statements were recorded after an unexplained delay of over a month. The Court remarked that such delay “renders their testimonies susceptible to embellishment, exaggeration, and afterthought.”
A key contradiction identified by the Bench was between ocular and medical evidence. While witnesses claimed that multiple accused attacked the deceased with sharp-edged weapons, the post-mortem revealed only a single firearm injury.
“This inconsistency between ocular and medical evidence strikes at the root of the prosecution case,” the judgment stated, adding that “the attribution of a common intention under Section 34 RPC becomes doubtful.”
The Court further flagged serious lapses in the investigation, including doubts over the FIR’s authenticity, failure to comply with Section 157 CrPC, and non-seizure of critical evidence such as the vehicle used to transport the injured and blood-stained clothes.
“Such omissions assume importance as they deprive the prosecution of independent corroboration,” the Bench said.
Consequently, the Court held that “the prosecution has failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt the involvement of appellants 2 to 4,” and ordered their acquittal, directing that they “be set at liberty forthwith if not involved in any other case.”
In contrast, the Court found that the case against Deepak Singh stood on a “markedly different footing,” with a consistent chain of circumstantial evidence establishing his guilt.
“The chain of circumstances is complete, consistent, and incompatible with any hypothesis other than his guilt,” the Bench held.
The Court relied on multiple factors, including recovery of a licensed 12-bore shotgun, ballistic evidence confirming it had been fired, and the presence of pellets matching the weapon. It also noted that cartridges had been issued to him shortly before the incident.
Crucially, the Court highlighted his unexplained absence from his Army posting: “This unexplained absence… provides a strong incriminating link. His presence in the vicinity, the procurement of cartridges, and his conduct in absconding from duty cumulatively lead to a singular inference that he was responsible for the fatal act.”
Addressing defence arguments regarding weak motive and investigative lapses, the Court reiterated that “defective investigation cannot be a ground for discarding otherwise reliable prosecution evidence.”
It concluded: “The offence under Section 302 RPC stands fully proved against him, and his conviction warrants no interference.”
According to the prosecution, the incident occurred on July 8, 2014, when Vinod Kumar was shot dead inside his shop in Sattrayian village, RS Pura. The prosecution alleged that Deepak Singh fired the fatal shot while the co-accused were armed with sharp-edged weapons.
The injured was taken to Government Hospital, R.S. Pura, where he was declared brought dead. Following investigation, all four accused were chargesheeted and later convicted by the trial court.
Allowing the appeal in part, the High Court ruled: “While the prosecution fails to establish the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt…the chain of circumstantial evidence clearly points towards appellant Deepak Singh as the perpetrator of the offence.”
Accordingly, the Court set aside the conviction and sentence of the three co-accused, while dismissing the appeal of Deepak Singh and affirming his life sentence.
The reference from the trial court was answered in the same terms, with directions issued for compliance.
Leave a Reply