It was a series of omissions and contradictions in the prosecution theory and witnesses’ accounts that led to the acquittal of the six accused of the murder of Ujjain’s Prof H S Sabharwal in 2006, says the full judgment by Additional Sessions Judge Nitin Dalvi.

The court had on July 13 acquitted Shashiranjan Akela, Vimal Tomar, Vishal Rajoria, Hemant Dube, Pankaj Mishra and Sudhir Yadav of the charges, citing lack of evidence. Sabharwal, head of political science department, Madhav College, was killed during a melee over postponement of students’ polls in Ujjain on August 26, 2006.

“A professor lost his life on account of a small reason of postponing the elections and we are at pains to comment that justice can’t be given to him by embroiling wrong persons,” the judge says in the full judgment. While the prosecution contended that the incident had seven witnesses, the judge observes “the presence of the accused on the spot itself is not established.”

He rules that the testimony of two witnesses, Dilip Tripathi and Sanjay Mohan Singh, establishes that the accused had come to the spot and participated in a protest, but had then left to meet the education minister. Others present on the scene had turned hostile before the Ujjain court but were also examined.

“But evidence of hostile witnesses can’t be accepted unless it is corroborated,” the judgment reads, adding that the public prosecutor appears to have “conceded” that no evidence is available against the accused.

Also, no identification parade was held for the accused. The public prosecutor contended that four of the accused were identified in court, a move that the court calls deviation from process.

... contd.