Man Acquitted After Six Years in Custody Must Get Rs 6 Lakh Reparation, Rules Supreme Court

Man Acquitted After Six Years in Custody Must Get Rs 6 Lakh Reparation, Rules Supreme Court in Arun @ Deepak v. State of U.P.

Case: Arun @ Deepak v. State of U.P.
Citation: 2026 INSC 1150
Date of Judgment: 26 October 2026
Court: Supreme Court of India
Coram: Justice J. B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran
Proceedings: Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 4859 of 2026

Court Observation

“It is unfortunate that despite no evidence against the petitioner herein, he was imprisoned for six years as an undertrial. Based on a slipshod investigation, a haphazard prosecution was carried out, which resulted, fortunately, in the acquittal of the accused.”

Summary

The Supreme Court has directed the State of Uttar Pradesh to pay Rs 6 lakh as reparation to a man who spent six years in custody as an undertrial in a murder case before being acquitted. The Court described the investigation as slipshod and the prosecution as haphazard, and called the petitioner a victim of the system.

The petitioner had challenged an order of the Allahabad High Court denying him bail in a kidnapping and murder case registered in Agra in 2019. He had been in custody since 14 November 2019. On 23 March, the Supreme Court directed the trial court to conclude the proceedings within three months, after which the trial was completed and he was acquitted.

Examining the trial record itself, the Court found that not even a rudimentary investigation had been carried out. Only six witnesses were examined, the prosecution relied on a confession made to the police that was inadmissible in evidence, a motorcycle recovered from the spot was never produced in court, forensic results on the recovered bones were not disclosed, no DNA sample was taken from the victim’s father, and CCTV footage was not supported by the certificate required under Section 65B of the Evidence Act.

Key Holdings

  • A person who suffers years of undertrial custody on the strength of a concocted story built on surmises and conjectures is entitled to reparation from the State.
  • Investigating and prosecuting agencies exist not merely to secure a conviction by whatever means, but to ensure justice to the victim, the complainant and the accused alike.
  • The State cannot shirk its responsibility to protect its citizens, particularly since a person accused of an offence is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
  • Where the investigation is so deficient that it puts a person’s life and liberty in jeopardy, the Court may examine the trial record and direct reparation even after acquittal.

Directions Issued

  • The State of Uttar Pradesh shall pay Rs 6,00,000 to the petitioner within one month, with interest at 18% per annum on any delay beyond that period.
  • A copy of the judgment shall be sent to the Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh, and to the Home Secretary, Uttar Pradesh.
  • The State police would do well to educate their officers in the process of investigation.

Background

The petitioner was accused in a kidnapping and murder case registered in Agra in 2019 and remained in custody from 14 November 2019 after the Allahabad High Court denied him bail. The prosecution case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence. The Supreme Court first intervened on 23 March, directing the trial to be completed within three months; the trial ended in acquittal, after which the Court examined the record and found the investigation and prosecution deeply flawed.

Disclaimer: This is a summary prepared for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should refer to the official judgment for the authoritative text.

Tags: , ,