NEW DELHI — India's Supreme Court has acquitted a man who spent 22 years in prison after finding that his conviction was based on an improper assessment of evidence and that his appeal had remained unresolved for years, bringing to an end one of the country's longest-running criminal justice cases.
The ruling, delivered this week, set aside the man's conviction and ordered his release, with the court concluding that the prosecution had failed to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The judges said the trial court had erred in evaluating the evidence and criticized the prolonged delay in hearing the appeal, describing it as a serious failure of the justice system.
According to the judgment, the man had remained incarcerated for more than two decades while his appeal against conviction was pending before the Odisha High Court. The Supreme Court said such an extended delay effectively deprived him of a meaningful opportunity to challenge the verdict and undermined the constitutional guarantee of a fair trial.
The bench found that the evidence presented during the trial did not justify sustaining the conviction. It held that deficiencies in the prosecution's case and errors in the appreciation of evidence required the conviction to be overturned, leading to the man's acquittal.
The judgment also highlighted broader concerns over delays in the criminal justice system, noting that appeals involving convicted prisoners should be heard within a reasonable period. The court emphasized that prolonged incarceration while awaiting appellate review can result in irreversible harm, particularly when a conviction is later found to be unsustainable.
The case has drawn renewed attention to India's judicial backlog, where criminal appeals can remain pending for years because of heavy caseloads. Legal experts have long argued that delays in deciding appeals increase the risk of wrongful imprisonment and erode confidence in the justice system.
The Supreme Court has, in several recent decisions, stressed the need for careful evaluation of evidence before sustaining criminal convictions and has warned against allowing procedural shortcomings or weak evidence to result in prolonged imprisonment. In separate rulings this year, it has also underscored that convictions cannot rest on inadequate or uncorroborated evidence alone.
With the acquittal, the court directed that the man be released unless required in connection with any other case, bringing to a close a legal ordeal that lasted more than two decades.
