The Supreme Court has acquitted a man who spent more than 16 years in prison after being convicted of the sexual assault and murder of a minor boy, holding that the prosecution failed to establish a complete and reliable chain of evidence against him.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva observed that the case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, including the prosecution's claim that the accused was the last person seen with the victim. However, the Court found several gaps in the evidence and held that the circumstances did not conclusively establish his guilt.

The bench set aside the man's conviction and life sentence imposed by the trial court, as well as the Punjab and Haryana High Court's decision upholding the conviction.

According to the prosecution, the minor went missing on March 11, 2007, and his body was recovered from a well the following day. The accused was allegedly the last person seen with the child and was accused of committing an unnatural sexual assault before smothering the boy to death and throwing his body into the well.

The prosecution also relied on an alleged extra-judicial confession purportedly made by the accused before the village sarpanch two days after the incident.

However, the Supreme Court found the alleged confession difficult to accept, particularly since there was no apparent connection between the accused, the victim and the sarpanch.

The Court reiterated that an extra-judicial confession is generally considered a weak form of evidence and cannot, by itself, form the basis of a conviction unless it is supported by independent and credible corroborative evidence.

"If, however, the extra-judicial confession suffers from material discrepancies or inherent improbabilities and does not appear to be cogent as per the prosecution version, it may be difficult for the court to base a conviction on such a confession," the bench observed.

The Supreme Court also questioned the prosecution's reliance on an open packet of namkeen allegedly recovered from the spot.

The bench noted that the packet was seized on March 12, while the prosecution's claim that the accused had purchased a packet of namkeen emerged only on March 14, after the alleged confession.

"There is no such evidence to link the packet of namkeen allegedly recovered from the spot with the packet of namkeen allegedly bought by the accused from the shop of the PW7," the Court said.

It further observed that an open packet of namkeen, which was readily available and commonly sold throughout the village, could not by itself establish the accused's presence at the scene of the crime.

The Court also found that the prosecution's "last seen together" theory was not supported by the testimony of its witnesses.

Another circumstance that raised doubts was the prosecution witnesses' statement that the accused had already been brought to the police station on March 12, two days before he allegedly made the extra-judicial confession.

Taking note of these inconsistencies, the bench concluded that the prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.

"As noticed above, there are several missing links in the chain of the prosecution case which, in our view, do not establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused was the person who committed the offence," the Court said.

The Supreme Court accordingly allowed the appeal and quashed the orders of both the trial court and the High Court.

The bench also noted that the appellant had already spent more than 16 years and seven months in custody. An earlier direction requiring his release forthwith, unless his detention was legally required in connection with another case, was reaffirmed by the Court.