File photo: Supreme Court of India, New Delhi
Photo: Subhashish Panigrahi
Source: Wikimedia Commons
Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0
Judgment Intelligence
Acquittal UpheldState of Himachal Pradesh vs. Varinder Verma @ Jatti and Another
2026 INSC 1028
Criminal Appeal No(s). 67/2018
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Date of Decision
- 17 September 2026
- Bench
- Justice Manoj Misra, Justice Vijay Bishnoi
- Relevant Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 -- Sections 302 and 34; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 -- Section 313
Final Outcome
The State's appeal was dismissed; the High Court's acquittal of both respondents stands affirmed. Pending applications, if any, were disposed of (paras 21-22).
Source Supreme Court of India, decided 17 September 2026
Key holdings
- A circumstantial-evidence conviction requires a complete chain of circumstances excluding every hypothesis except the guilt of the accused (para 11).
- A witness who reaches the crime scene quickly but withholds a gravely incriminating circumstance for hours, without cogent reason, loses much of the value of that testimony (paras 16-18).
- Recoveries of weapons and clothes made three days after arrest, through unexamined seizure witnesses, were found to appear stage-managed rather than genuine (para 20).
- A matching blood group alone, without DNA profiling, does not conclusively establish that blood on recovered clothes belonged to the deceased (para 6).
- Where the prosecution's own witnesses do not inspire confidence and key circumstances remain inconclusive, the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt (para 7).
Judgment digest by NyayVidhan: a summary of the court's judgment, not its text. The judgment itself is the authoritative version.
Brief Facts
Two men were found dead by a roadside in Himachal Pradesh with head injuries, near scattered wooden pieces. The trial court convicted Varinder Verma and Dev Raj under Sections 302/34 IPC based on a witness sighting, recovered Dandas and blood-stained clothes matching the deceased's blood group, and alleged motive, sentencing them to life imprisonment. The High Court acquitted them, giving benefit of doubt, and the State appealed to the Supreme Court.
Court's Findings
The Court held the circumstantial evidence did not form a complete chain excluding every hypothesis of innocence. PW-2's identification of the accused in darkness did not inspire confidence, and he did not even state that the accused were carrying Dandas at the time (para 13). PW-3, an interested witness who reached the scene within two hours, inexplicably withheld the key incriminating circumstance from the informant, weakening his testimony under the principle in Kali Ram v. State of H.P. (paras 16-18). The recoveries of the Dandas and the blood-stained clothes came three days after arrest, involved unexamined seizure witnesses, and appeared stage-managed and artificial (para 20). Without DNA profiling, a matching blood group alone did not conclusively link the clothes to the deceased (para 6).
Legal Principle
A conviction resting on circumstantial evidence requires a complete chain excluding every hypothesis except guilt. A witness's unexplained delay in disclosing a gravely incriminating fact loses much of its evidentiary value; recoveries made days after arrest, with seizure witnesses unexamined, do not inspire confidence (paras 11, 18, 20).