5 min readNew DelhiFeb 27, 2026 05:52 PM ISTNoting inconsistencies in the witness statements, the Allahabad High Court observed that the convict had said that he had been implicated in this case because of an enmity with the complainant. (Image generated using AI)Allahabad High Court news: After spending nearly 23 years behind bars, the Allahabad High Court acquitted a man convicted of murdering his wife and three minor children in 2003, observing that the prosecution evidence was not convincing enough.A division bench of Justices Siddharth and Jai Krishna Upadhyay allowed the appeal filed by Raees, who was convicted by a trial court under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).“It is a gruesome murder of a mother and her three children in most brutal manner but we are not convinced that prosecution evidence is such which conclusively implicates and proves that the offence was committed by none other than the appellant of this case. Hence the appellant deserves to be extended benefit of doubt,” the court noted in an order dated February 16.Also Read | ‘Not isolated offence’: Why Allahabad High Court upheld NSA detention of 3 men over ‘cattle slaughter’ during Chaitra NavratriBefore parting with the case, the bench noted that the appellant’s ordeal might not end with his release. It observed that after over two decades in prison, his family circumstances would have changed, and it was uncertain whether his surviving son would accept him.Describing the case as a “sad commentary on our criminal justice delivery system”, the high court said it “requires introspection and real remedial measures like increasing the number of judges, their supporting staff and infrastructure. There is no shortcut to hard work required for deciding criminal appeals. Just holding conferences and meetings can never ameliorate the situation.” Justices Siddharth and Jai Krishna Upadhyay allowed the appeal on February 16.The caseThe prosecution alleged that the complainant lodged a First Information Report (FIR) after receiving information that the appellant had murdered his wife and their three children.It was alleged that after an altercation between the appellant and his wife, he stabbed his wife and the three children, causing their death.An investigation was conducted and murder charges were framed against the appellant.The trial court convicted him.Also Read | 75% disabled, 100% defiant: From being put on mute to winning in Supreme Court, how Arvind Rao is redefining inclusionCourt observes discrepanciesIt is notable that the complainant is the uncle of the appellant’s wife.Though the woman’s parents were alive, they did not lodge any FIR against the appellant, their son-in-law.There is contradiction in the statements of the witnesses – the complainant uncle and the fourth child of the appellant – with regard to the mode and manner of information given and received by the uncle regarding the alleged incident.The uncle had claimed that when he reached the place of incident, a total of 20 people had reached the spot and the villagers gathered informed them that a quarrel took place between the appellant and his wife, following which the appellant allegedly committed the murders.During cross-examination, the complainant could not state the name of even one such villager who informed him regarding the aforementioned quarrel.The complainant, however, admitted that apart from the deceased woman’s parents, her three brothers were also present there, but none of them lodged the FIR or stepped into the witness box to prove the case against the appellant.Enmity with complainant, other inconsistenciesIf the statement of the appellant’s minor son is read with the statement of the appellant recorded under Section 313 (power to examine accused) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC, he has clearly stated that at the time of incident, he had gone to sell husk outside the village.The appellant has also stated that because of the enmity with the complainant, he has been implicated in this case.The time and place of arrest of the appellant and the recovery of the knife on his pointing out are not credible, and do not prove the prosecution’s case that the appellant vanished after committing an alleged offence at midnight.Other evidences against the appellant are in the form of statements of two prosecution witnesses, who claimed that he made extrajudicial confessions before them regarding murdering his wife and three children.Also Read | ‘Silent biological hazard’: Jharkhand High Court issues slew of directions to enforce biomedical waste rules in 12-year-old PILExtrajudicial confession ‘weak’ type of evidenceThe evidentiary value of extrajudicial confession has been considered by the courts a number of times and it has been found to be a weak type of evidence which cannot be accepted without corroboration from other evidence.The extrajudicial confession cannot be accepted if it suffers from material discrepancy or, being inherently improbable, does not inspire the confidence of court.The two-month delay by the police in recording statements also raises doubt about the veracity of the statements made before the court.The overall conduct and statements are doubtful and cannot be made the basis of sustaining the conviction of the appellant.The appellant has been languishing in jail for the last 23 years. He is directed to be set free, if not wanted in any other case.Ashish Shaji is a Senior Sub-Editor at The Indian Express, where he specializes in legal journalism. Combining a formal education in law with years of editorial experience, Ashish provides authoritative coverage and nuanced analysis of court developments and landmark judicial decisions for a national audience. Expertise Legal Core Competency: Ashish is a law graduate (BA LLB) from IME Law College, CCSU. This academic foundation allows him to move beyond surface-level reporting, offering readers a deep-dive into the technicalities of statutes, case law, and legal precedents. Specialized Legal Reporting: His work at The Indian Express focuses on translating the often-dense proceedings of India's top courts into clear, actionable news. His expertise includes: Judicial Analysis: Breaking down complex orders from the Supreme Court and various High Courts. Legal Developments: Monitoring legislative changes and their practical implications for the public and the legal fraternity. Industry Experience: With over 5 years in the field, Ashish has contributed to several niche legal and professional platforms, honing his ability to communicate complex information. His previous experience includes: Lawsikho: Gaining insights into legal education and practical law. Verdictum: Focusing on high-quality legal news and court updates. Enterslice: Working at the intersection of legal, financial, and advisory services. ... Read More © IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd