Trial court awards life term, High Court acquits:clue found 1,900 km away turns murder case on its head

In Part 1 of Madhya Pradesh Crime Files, we reported that on the night of September 20, 2021, Rajendra Pandre mysteriously went missing from the Bichhiya police station area of Mandla district while speaking to a young woman on the phone. Five days later, on September 25, his mutilated body was recovered from a forest—his trousers and underwear missing and his private parts severed. What initially appeared to be a clear-cut case of honour killing later took a dramatic legal turn, when the Jabalpur High Court overturned the life sentence, laying bare serious lapses in the police investigation and the prosecution’s version of events. What did he tell the police? Read in Part-2 of Crime Files… What appeared to be a clear-cut case of “honour killing” in Madhya Pradesh took a dramatic turn when the Jabalpur High Court overturned a life sentence, exposing serious flaws in the police investigation and prosecution narrative. The disappearance and a shocking discovery On the night of September 20, 2021, Rajendra Pendre went missing under mysterious circumstances from the Bichhiya police station area of Mandla district in Madhya Pradesh. At the time of his disappearance, he was reportedly speaking on the phone with a young woman from his village. Five days later, on September 25, Rajendra’s body was found in a forest. His trousers and underwear were missing, and his private parts had been mutilated. Initially, the incident was suspected to be a wild animal attack, but the post-mortem report confirmed it was a case of murder. During the investigation, police learned that Rajendra was in a romantic relationship with a village girl named Sonal and had last spoken to her before he disappeared. A case stuck without leads Police camped in the village for nearly two months but failed to find any concrete evidence. The case appeared to be heading towards the list of unsolved crimes until, four months later, a supposed eyewitness emerged—changing the course of the investigation entirely. A witness traced 1,900 km away in Kerala Just as hopes were fading, police received information about Chain Singh, a man who was present in the village on the night of the incident and was now working in Kerala, nearly 1,900 kilometres away. Seeing this as a breakthrough, a police team brought him back to Mandla for questioning. Chain Singh claimed that on September 20, he had gone to visit a friend in Atariya village. On his way back, his motorcycle broke down near the house of Nain Singh, Sonal’s father. It was around 7–7:30 pm. Unable to fix the bike, Nain Singh allegedly asked him to stay the night. According to Chain Singh, around 9:30 pm, he heard screams—people shouting that someone had entered the house and was misbehaving with their daughter. When he went outside, he allegedly saw Nain Singh and his son Sandeep brutally beating a man. Confessions, conviction, and life imprisonment Chain Singh’s statement became the cornerstone of the police case. Based on his testimony, Nain Singh and Sandeep were arrested. Police claimed both accused confessed during interrogation. According to the alleged confession: Based on these statements and Chain Singh’s testimony, police concluded it was a case of honour killing. The district court accepted the prosecution’s version and sentenced both accused to life imprisonment. The big twist: High Court steps in Believing justice had been served, the case seemed closed—until Nain Singh and Sandeep challenged the verdict in the Jabalpur High Court. They maintained their innocence, alleging that the police had fabricated the entire story. They claimed: High Court verdict: Acquittal on July 30, 2025 On July 30, 2025, a division bench comprising Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Avnindra Kumar Singh delivered a landmark judgment. The High Court overturned the trial court’s decision and acquitted both accused, citing serious inconsistencies and investigative lapses. Why the conviction was overturned The High Court highlighted multiple weaknesses in the prosecution’s case: 1. Star Witness Found Unreliable The court ruled that Chain Singh was not a trustworthy eyewitness. He admitted that he learned details of the incident only after returning from Kerala. Crucially, Rajendra’s mother testified that Chain Singh had stayed not at Nain Singh’s house that night, but at another villager’s house nearby. 2. Contradictions in Call Detail Records According to the post-mortem report, Rajendra had died 4–6 days before his body was found. However, call records suggested that phone calls were made from his mobile even after the estimated time of death—raising serious doubts about the prosecution’s timeline. 3. Motive Not Proven The prosecution failed to establish motive. Sonal was never produced as a witness, and no evidence was presented to prove that the family opposed her relationship with Rajendra. 4. Shoddy Investigation and Weak Recoveries The court noted that police failed to gather concrete evidence for four months and later constructed a fragile narrative. Recoveries of weapons and clothes from open forest areas were deemed unreliable, as such locations are accessible to anyone. A Case That Turned on Its Head What began as a seemingly straightforward honour killing case ended with a complete collapse of the prosecution’s story. The High Court’s ruling underscored the importance of credible evidence, reliable witnesses, and thorough investigation—reminding that suspicion, however strong, cannot replace proof in criminal law.