4 min readMumbaiApr 1, 2026 01:04 AM IST
First published on: Apr 1, 2026 at 12:15 AM IST
The Bombay High Court, while acquitting a man convicted of kidnapping and murdering a girl, about two years old, in 2013, recently held that police pressured him into a confession. The HC ruled the prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of circumstances, leaving the case incomplete, and flagged infirmities in the trial court’s judgment.
The HC noted police extracted the confession from the appellant even after another bench, in August 2014, directed handover of an abandoned girl traced by nearly 11 police teams, believed to be the missing child, after her DNA did not match the complainant’s parents.
A bench of Justices Ajey S Gadkari and Shyam C Chandak on March 25 passed a ruling on an appeal by 50-year-old man (appellant), who challenged the July 2024 conviction by special court in Thane district, observing that “facts of the case in hand are intriguing”.
On August 20, 2013, a one-year-and-10-month-old girl vanished from a neighbor’s birthday party outside her Thane home. Her mother filed a missing person complaint against a waterproofing worker who had been allegedly playing with the child at the venue.
Police probe revealed the worker kidnapped her and an alleged accomplice took the girl to Thane railway station to exploit her for begging and abandoned her there. Police arrested both and claimed CCTV footage from platform 10 showed scrap collector appellant taking her away.
In September 2013, police learned she had been taken to Hyderabad but searches there did not yield any result. After months without trace, the parents filed a habeas corpus petition in Bombay High Court. The court directed further probe.
The appellant allegedly told police he handed her to a man in Panvel who promised to care for her. When police found a girl among several children living with the man and his wife, the complainant parents identified her, and she was returned to them. Later, the High Court ordered a verification of the girl’s identity, but DNA tests showed she was not the complainants’ daughter.
On August 26 2014, another bench of HC ordered her handover to the Panvel couple and ordered further investigation.
Last week, Justice Gadkari-led bench observed that “despite this background” appellant’s unsigned confessional statement was recorded before magistrate court. “From here, the prosecution case took a dramatic twist. This unexpected shift posed a serious challenge to the integrity of the entire case,” the court observed.
Police claimed he confessed to prior convictions in other crimes, was jailed and released, therefore his parents had driven him out of the house. The confession allegedly claimed he assaulted the victim girl and killed her. A special court designated under the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act convicted appellant on July 9, 2024 based on the confession and evidence, which he challenged before the HC.
“Considering the evidence as a whole, it appears that both the confessions were the result of the pressure exerted upon the appellant by the police as the police machinery could not stand on its own legs. In view of the above discussion, both the confession must be ignored and we have neglected it, accordingly,” the HC noted.
” In the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that, since the matter was taken to this Court in the Writ Petition (habeas corpus), stage was managed by the police pressuring the Appellant to give the confessions and taking help of prosecution witnesses to show that the case was resolved. The chain of circumstances is not established by the prosecution and in fact it is incomplete,” the HC observed and set aside the trial court verdict.
Last week, Justice Gadkari-led bench observed that “despite this background” appellant’s unsigned confessional statement was recorded before magistrate court. “From here, the prosecution case took a dramatic twist. This unexpected shift posed a serious challenge to the integrity of the entire case,” the court observed.
Share
