PANCHKULA, MAY 18 – A four-year legal trial concerning the brutal murder of a Chandigarh railway worker has concluded with the acquittal of the prime suspect due to systemic investigative gaps and a complete lack of scientific corroboration.
The prosecution had alleged that Sameem, a resident of Uttar Pradesh, murdered Rozina Begum in January 2022 over an alleged personal dispute. However, the Additional District and Sessions Court ruled that the state relied entirely on unsubstantiated assumptions and compromised witness reports that could not stand up to judicial scrutiny.
Defense attorney Sameer Sethi maintained that his client was entitled to an outright acquittal given the profound flaws in the state’s investigation.
“In view of the serious contradictions, unreliable extra-judicial confession, hostile witnesses, doubtful recoveries, absence of scientific linkage, and complete failure of the prosecution to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt,” Sethi asserted.
The judicial order noted that critical investigative benchmarks were completely ignored. The court declared that the weapon introduced by the state was recovered prior to the suspect’s formal arrest, and no fingerprint or DNA processing was ever ordered to tie the blade to the accused.
The victim went missing on January 14, 2022, after attending a community gathering at the police station where she was employed. Her body was located the following morning with 17 deep lacerations.
The state’s efforts to establish a timeline using local transport records dissolved when their primary transit witness turned hostile. The driver stated in open court that his previous statements were manufactured under duress during unauthorized police detentions.
The court also dismissed a written confession presented by a former local official, noting that the document was drafted entirely by police handlers while the suspect was injured in custody.
The final judgment noted that not a single independent witness supported the prosecution’s theory regarding a personal motive. Because the police department failed to carry out fundamental biometric checks, review relevant CCTV timelines accurately, or establish basic blood-type compatibility, the court ruled that the charges lacked any legal foundation.
