The Supreme Court has drawn a sharp line through the old assumption that lack of motive is a reliable shield in murder trials. In a chilling case where a father killed his own son, the Court underscored that motive, while helpful, isn’t essential when the evidence tells its own unbroken, damning story.
“When the chain of circumstances is airtight, pointing squarely at the accused with no room for doubt or alternate theory, motive takes a backseat,” the bench declared. In other words, even if the “why” behind the crime remains a mystery, the “how” and “who” can be enough to convict.
The case in question? A father accused of killing his youngest son in the dead of night with a licensed revolver—then scrambling to stage it as a suicide. He was the first to “discover” the body, claiming his son had stabbed himself with a screwdriver. Problem is, the screwdriver was clean. No blood, no truth. Meanwhile, the accused’s dominant hand tested positive for gunshot residue. The revolver? Registered to him. In his home. Operated only by him.
Despite his claim of no motive and a suicide theory, the evidence didn’t just whisper guilt—it shouted.
The trial court found him guilty. The High Court agreed. And now, the Supreme Court has sealed the verdict. The absence of motive, it said, might weigh in favor of an accused when the case is flimsy. But not here—not when the accused was the only one who could’ve pulled the trigger, and the crime scene contradicted his every word.
The ruling echoed earlier jurisprudence: motive can be elusive, tucked away in the hidden corridors of the human mind. But its absence doesn’t erase physical facts. It doesn’t undo ballistic evidence, or make a false alibi true.
The Court also dismissed the accused’s version that the gun had been hidden by his children, calling it implausible. Witnesses, including family members, testified that he alone had access to the weapon. And his relationship with his wife and children? Fractured at best.
In a final blow to the suicide narrative, the Court noted the mother and daughters were asleep in another room, only waking up to the accused shouting in the night—just after the gun went off. What drew him to the scene? That too remains unanswered. But the questions he couldn’t answer, and the evidence he couldn’t explain, ultimately sealed his fate.
Conviction upheld. Life sentence confirmed.
