Noida Court Acquits Three Brothers in Decade-Old Attempted Murder Case After Witnesses Turn Hostile
In a significant legal development in Noida, three brothers accused of attempting to murder their cousin have been acquitted by the additional district and sessions court following a trial that spanned over a decade. The case collapsed as all key eyewitnesses turned hostile, refusing to support the prosecution's narrative and leading the court to conclude that the identity and role of the accused could not be established beyond a reasonable doubt.
Background of the Family Dispute and Criminal Case
The origins of this case trace back to April 2015, when a quarrel within an extended family in Gejha village escalated from a disagreement over house construction and alleged encroachment into a violent assault and subsequent criminal complaint. The incident was registered at the Phase-II police station after Adesh Tyagi accused his uncle Satish Tyagi and his three sons—Sushil, Anil, and Nitin—of attacking him with sticks and blunt objects following an argument the previous day regarding construction activity adjacent to their homes.
Police initially filed a case under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, including 308 (attempt to commit culpable homicide), 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (intentional insult), and 506 (criminal intimidation). A chargesheet was later submitted against all four accused, with charges formally framed by the sessions court in August 2019. However, the case took a turn when Satish Tyagi passed away in 2024, resulting in his name being dropped and leaving his three sons as the sole defendants in the trial.
Prosecution's Case Unravels as Witnesses Retract Statements
The prosecution's strategy hinged on the testimony of seven witnesses, four of whom were cited as eyewitnesses. Among these were Adesh's father, Jaiprakash, and his brother, Rajesh, both of whom were expected to corroborate the assault allegations. However, during the trial, both witnesses denied witnessing any fight or assault, dealing a severe blow to the prosecution's case.
Rajesh testified that while there were discussions within the family about construction on an adjoining plot, he did not observe any physical confrontation. Similarly, Jaiprakash disowned the prosecution's version entirely, claiming that his son's injuries were caused by construction material rather than an attack. As a result, both witnesses were declared hostile by the prosecution.
The case suffered a decisive and final setback when the complainant himself, Adesh Tyagi, retracted his earlier statements. Initially, during his examination on September 20, 2019, Adesh had asserted that he was attacked by his cousins. However, nearly three years later during cross-examination, he changed his testimony dramatically. He informed the court that his injuries were not the result of an assault by the accused but were instead caused by a falling pole. Adesh described his injuries as minor, stating he was treated and discharged from a government hospital, and attributed his earlier statement to advice from his lawyer.
According to his revised account, the dispute on the day of the incident was limited to a discussion about an extended balcony, which was resolved amicably without any physical confrontation. This retraction effectively dismantled the core of the prosecution's argument.
Court's Ruling and Legal Implications
In his ruling, Additional District and Sessions Judge Chandra Mohan Srivastava meticulously analyzed the evidence presented. He observed that the complainant failed to stand by the prosecution's case, and the prosecution as a whole did not meet the legal threshold required for conviction. The judge emphasized that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, a standard that was not achieved in this instance.
The court held, "From the analysis of all the evidence presented, it is concluded that the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the charges under IPC sections 308, 323, 504, and 506." Consequently, Judge Srivastava ordered the acquittal of the three accused brothers, bringing an end to a legal battle that had persisted for more than ten years.
This case highlights the critical importance of witness reliability in criminal trials and underscores how hostile witnesses can fundamentally undermine prosecution efforts, especially in long-drawn legal proceedings where memories may fade or personal dynamics shift over time.
