Quick Read
- Surendra Koli, accused in the infamous 2006 Nithari Killings, has been acquitted by the Supreme Court of India in the final remaining case after a curative petition.
- The bench held that the same evidence previously found inadmissible in twelve companion cases was being used to support his conviction in this one, which violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
- Koli had spent nearly two decades in custody and faced the death penalty; with this verdict, all criminal cases against him in connection with Nithari are now over.
What and Where
The Nithari killings took place around Sector-31, Noida (Uttar Pradesh), in and around the residence known as House D5 belonging to businessman Moninder Singh Pandher. The case involved missing children and discoveries of human remains behind the house and in nearby drains.
When
The apex court’s decision came on 11 November 2025, when it allowed Koli’s curative petition and ordered his acquittal and immediate release, saying the curative jurisdiction was needed to correct the anomaly.
How and Why
- The court found that Koli’s conviction rested on a confession under Section 164 CrPC and recovery under Section 27 of the Evidence Act but the same kind of confession-recovery pattern had already been rejected in the twelve other cases.
- It noted procedural violations: lengthy police custody before confessions, lack of contemporaneous disclosure, and known locations of recovered items. Because the evidentiary basis was tainted, the conviction could not stand.
- Despite the horrific nature of the crimes, the court reaffirmed that “criminal law does not permit conviction on conjecture or on a hunch” and that “justice must be done in accordance with law and not expediency”.
Implications
- For victims’ families, the verdict is deeply controversial: it brings legal closure but leaves unanswered questions about who actually committed the crimes. The court itself expressed “deep regret” that the true perpetrators were not established.
- The case underscores the importance of fair investigation and robust evidence even in high-profile, emotionally charged cases, the rule of law must prevail.
- From a criminal justice perspective, it sets a precedent for reviewing cases where identical evidence leads to differing outcomes and stresses the role of the curative petition in correcting miscarriages of justice.
The Supreme Court’s decision to acquit Surendra Koli marks the legal end of one of India’s most notorious serial-murder cases but also raises challenging questions around investigation quality, victim closure, and public confidence in the justice system.
