Daijiworld Media Network - Mangaluru
Mangaluru, Oct 30: In a scathing judgment that has raised serious questions about police accountability, a Mangaluru court fully acquitted the accused in the 2021 Urwa police station incident, declaring that the prosecution’s case was riddled with contradictions, fabricated evidence, and procedural lapses. The detailed 60-page judgment dated October 29, in Criminal Case No. 2649/2021, not only exonerated the accused but also exposed glaring inconsistencies in the official narrative.
The case, filed in July 2021, had alleged that three residents — Noel Sequeira, Johan Sequeira, and their daughter — misbehaved and attempted to assault women constables inside the Urwa police station. The police had registered cases under Sections 332, 353, 504 and 506 of the IPC and the Karnataka destruction of lawful property act, and the incident was widely reported at the time, portraying the trio as aggressors. However, the recent court verdict has completely overturned that portrayal.
Court finds prosecution story baseless
The court observed that there were serious contradictions in the evidence presented by the prosecution and concluded that the charges were not proven beyond reasonable doubt. As a result, all the accused were given the benefit of doubt and acquitted.
Contradictory testimonies and fabricated claims
The testimonies of the prosecution witnesses who themselves were police officials were reportedly contradiction of each other. Some witnesses admitted that they did not understand the meaning of the alleged abusive words, while others were unable to recall them accurately. The court also noted that video evidence and photographs showed the police officers themselves pushing one of the accused, which contradicted the allegations of assault.
The supposed damage to a policewoman’s nameplate was also found to be unsubstantiated. The court pointed out that the nameplate was visible and intact in the video evidence. It also found that seizure procedures were not properly followed, as the relevant documents lacked signatures of witnesses, and the witnesses themselves admitted they were unaware of the contents.
Suppressed and missing video evidence
Although several police officers claimed to have recorded the incident, the court noted that no full video footage had been submitted. The incomplete clips that were produced actually supported the defense. The court questioned why a complete recording was not presented and concluded that the absence of full footage and the missing mobile evidence cast serious doubt on the prosecution’s case.
Medical records contradict injury claims
The wound certificate of the complainant police officer reportedly showed no external injuries, directly contradicting the claims that the accused had physically assaulted her. The court found this inconsistency significant, ruling that the medical evidence did not support the prosecution’s version.
Doubtful forensic and chain-of-custody lapses
The allegation that the accused were intoxicated at the time of the incident was also rejected. The court found that the prosecution had failed to maintain a proper chain of custody for the blood samples and noted that the presence of ethyl alcohol could have been caused by improper storage and lack of preservatives.
Police not proven to be ‘on duty’
A major procedural flaw identified by the court was that there was no evidence to show the police officers were officially on duty at the time of the alleged incident. This omission undermined the charges that the accused had obstructed public servants from performing their duties.
Accused represented self, exposed false case
In a rare move, one of the accused argued the case personally, without legal counsel. Through detailed submissions, he reportedly highlighted contradictions, evidence suppression, and instances of custodial violence. The court acknowledged these issues and noted that the prosecution had failed to establish the essential ingredients of the offenses alleged.
Verdict restores reputation after years of ordeal
The judgment marked the end of a four-year legal battle that began with a police press briefing branding the accused as offenders. Now, with the court’s findings, the individuals have been vindicated — their innocence established through a fair judicial process.
The ruling has sparked discussions among legal experts and civil rights advocates, who say the case highlights the importance of judicial scrutiny in preventing misuse of authority.
The JMFC’s comprehensive order laid bare an attempted frame-up within a police station — a place meant to uphold justice. The verdict not only acquitted the accused but also exposed how poor investigation practices, contradictory witness statements, suppression of evidence can erode public trust. In spite of the honourable apex court’s orders, the police officials failed to produce the CCTV footage before the honourable court.
Every lapse and inconsistency in the prosecution’s case now stands recorded, vindicating those who fought the system alone and proving that persistence and truth can ultimately prevail in the face of false accusations.