The Delhi High Court has acquitted a man who was convicted in a 1983 murder case for allegedly shouting “Maro Saale Ko” during a violent altercation inside a DTC bus, holding that the phrase alone is insufficient to establish a common intention to commit murder.

A Division Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja extended the benefit of doubt to Mukesh Kumar, observing that the word “maro” could mean “beat” and does not necessarily imply an intention to kill.

“The use of the words ‘Maro Sale Ko’ by themselves also does not imply the intention to kill; they can also be attributed to the intention to hurt,” the Court observed.

The case arose from an incident that took place on December 1, 1983, inside a Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) bus operating on route number 431. According to the prosecution, a group of young men allegedly misbehaved with two women passengers, leading to a confrontation after Vinod Kumar and his friends objected.

During the altercation, co-accused Balvinder Singh allegedly stabbed Vinod Kumar, who later succumbed to his injuries. The prosecution claimed that Mukesh Kumar, who was standing at the rear of the bus, encouraged the assault by shouting “Maro Saale Ko.”

Four persons, including Mukesh Kumar, were arrested during the investigation. They declined to participate in a Test Identification Parade (TIP), arguing that witnesses had already seen them before the exercise.

Subsequently, a chargesheet was filed under Sections 302 (murder), 307 (attempt to murder) and 34 (acts done with common intention) of the Indian Penal Code.

In August 2004, a Delhi trial court convicted Mukesh Kumar and two others for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment. Mukesh later challenged the conviction before the High Court.

Before the High Court, Mukesh argued that the prosecution had failed to establish that he shared a common intention with the co-accused to commit murder. He also questioned the credibility of the identification process and highlighted inconsistencies in eyewitness testimonies.

The High Court accepted these arguments and pointed out significant doubts surrounding the TIP proceedings. It noted that witnesses may have seen the accused before the identification exercise, thereby weakening the reliability of both the TIP and the subsequent dock identification in court.

The Bench further observed that no weapon was attributed to Mukesh and that the prosecution's case against him rested primarily on the allegation that he had shouted “Maro Saale Ko.”

Examining whether this alone could attract liability under Section 34 IPC, the Court held that the prosecution had failed to prove that Mukesh shared a common intention to commit murder.

The judges noted there was no evidence to suggest that Mukesh knew the co-accused were carrying knives or that he was part of any pre-planned attack. The Court also flagged inconsistencies in witness statements regarding the timing and circumstances of the alleged exhortation.

Accordingly, the High Court set aside Mukesh Kumar's conviction and acquitted him of all charges.

Notably, the appeal had remained pending before the Delhi High Court for 22 years.

Mukesh Kumar was represented by Advocates Himanshu Anand Gupta, Mansi Yadav, Karan Jain, Mike Desai and Shekhar Anand Gupta. The State was represented by Additional Public Prosecutor Aman Usman along with Advocates Manvendra Yadav and Atiq Ur Rehman.