Shillong, March 19: The High Court of Meghalaya has acquitted a 51-year-old woman from West Jaintia Hills, overturning her life sentence in a 2003 murder case after finding serious gaps in evidence and procedural lapses in the trial.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice W Diengdoh delivered the verdict on March 18, 2026, quashing the August 31, 2021 judgment that had convicted Porthmi Bthuh under Sections 302 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code.
The case dates back to March 28, 2003, when Bthuh was accused of fatally attacking her husband, Kor, with a dao following a domestic dispute. Her four-year-old son, Donmi, also died from injuries sustained during the incident, while her infant daughter survived with serious injuries. Bthuh herself had suffered self-inflicted wounds. The FIR was filed by a village headman, despite reports that the family had settled the matter.
The trial court had based its conviction primarily on a confession allegedly recorded before a magistrate under Section 164 of the CrPC. However, the High Court found the confession unreliable, citing multiple procedural violations. It noted that the statement was recorded a day after the arrest without giving the accused adequate time for reflection, key sections of the confession format were left blank, and mandatory legal endorsements were missing. The court also observed that the confession was never formally exhibited during the trial and there was no evidence that a copy had been provided to the accused.
Highlighting the absence of direct evidence, the bench pointed out that none of the eight witnesses examined had seen the incident inside the house. Witnesses only reported seeing the accused holding a weapon after the घटना, which the court said was insufficient to establish guilt. Crucially, the alleged murder weapons were never sent for forensic examination, and key investigative leads were not pursued.
The court also rejected the prosecution’s reliance on Section 106 of the Evidence Act, stating that it cannot compensate for the failure to establish a complete chain of evidence. Referring to the legal principles governing circumstantial evidence, the bench held that the prosecution had failed to meet the required standard of proof.
Concluding that the case lacked “cogent, legal and admissible evidence,” the High Court set aside the conviction and ordered Bthuh’s immediate release, bringing an end to a case in which she had spent years in custody without conclusive proof of guilt.
