What Allahabad High Court had said in its 2023 order on Nithari killings

The Allahabad HC had pointed to unsatisfactory “evidence”, procedural loopholes and “improbable possibilities” in its judgment.

The one investigative loophole pointed out by the court was the “failure” to investigate the “possible” angle of organ trade.

In its judgment, the court said that the house of the accused was adjacent to one belonging to a doctor who “apparently was a suspect in a case of organ trade (kidney transplant).” It said that despite specific recommendations made by the high-level committee constituted by the Ministry of Women and Child Development, investigators did not look into the matter, calling it a “betrayal of public trust by responsible agencies”.

The court called the prosecution’s case circumstantial and said there were lapses in the arrest, disclosure statement and in the way the confessions had been recorded.

Arrest

While the defence alleged that the arrest was made on December 27, 2006, the prosecution said the arrests were made two days later. The court said the prosecution had failed to prove the circumstance of the arrest and there was no arrest memo on record.

Disclosure statement

The court said the disclosure statement of the accused was not placed on record and the prosecution evidence on the place and time of making the statement was “full of contradictions”.

For this reason, it said, the discovery of bones, skulls or skeletons recovered from the drain behind the house could not be placed in evidence.

Confession

The court had raised questions about the 60-day long continuous police and CBI custody for the two accused.

Pointing out that the police had told the court that Koli had confessed on December 29, 2006, the HC had said there was “no reason as to why he was not produced before the magistrate before March 1, 2007 for recording of his confessional statement”.

“Accused, at the first opportunity, retracted… confession and alleged that he was brutally tortured while in police custody. He offered to be medically examined as his genitals were burnt and his nails had been extracted but the accused was not examined medically,” the court said.

“There was no legal aid given to the accused and the legal aid given for 5 minutes by the ACMM, Delhi on March 1, 2007 amounts to its denial…” it had added.

It also said there was no “independent corroboration of murder, rape or cannibalism in the confession”… and that the events mentioned in the confession were “highly improbable”.