In a landmark judgment on Tuesday, the Supreme Court of India acquitted Surendra Koli, the convicted accused in the infamous Nithari killings, in the only remaining case in which his conviction and life sentence still stood. The apex court held that the 2011 verdict could not be sustained when Koli had already been acquitted in 12 other connected casesarising from the same facts and evidence. This ruling effectively closes a long and complex chapter in one of India’s most notorious criminal cases.

A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Bhushan R Gavai and Justices Surya Kant and Vikram Nath emphasized that maintaining Koli’s conviction in just one case, while acquitting him in all other cases based on identical material, would be both anomalous and unjust. Justice Vikram Nath, delivering the verdict on behalf of the bench, stated, “The petitioner be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. The jail superintendent is to be informed of this judgment immediately.”

This ruling came on the basis of Koli’s curative petition, his final judicial remedy, which the Supreme Court had reserved after indicating on October 7 that upholding the solitary conviction would amount to a “travesty of justice.” Koli was represented in the court by senior counsel Yug Mohit Chaudhary and advocate Payoshi Roy. The curative petition is a rare legal mechanism, typically heard in chambers, and is invoked only in exceptional circumstances such as denial of a fair hearing, judicial bias, or manifest abuse of the court’s process that results in grave injustice.

The Supreme Court’s decision was grounded in the observation that the evidence used to convict Koli in the last remaining case—primarily a purported confession and the recovery of a kitchen knife from a lane behind his residence—was the same evidence that had already led to his acquittal in the 12 other cases. The bench noted that relying on such evidence to sustain a conviction in a single case would undermine the principles of justice and fairness.

The Nithari killings, which shocked India and drew widespread media attention, came to light in 2007 after skeletal remains of several children were discovered in a drain behind the Noida home of businessman Moninder Singh Pandher, where Koli was employed as a domestic aide. The discovery triggered nationwide outrage and led to the immediate arrest of both Koli and Pandher. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which later took over the investigation, alleged that Koli had lured young girls to Pandher’s residence, sexually assaulted, and murdered them. In some reports, the agency even accused Koli of cannibalism, though these claims remained highly controversial.

Between 2005 and 2007, authorities registered 16 cases of rape and murder, of which trial courts initially convicted Koli in 13 and Pandher in two. Over the years, as appeals and higher court reviews progressed, the majority of these convictions were overturned, raising serious concerns about the reliability of the investigation and the procedures followed by law enforcement agencies.

In October 2023, the Allahabad High Court acquitted Koli in 12 of the 13 cases, citing grave procedural lapses, unreliable evidence, and faulty recoveries that were unsupported by a valid disclosure statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. The Supreme Court, on July 30, 2025, dismissed the CBI’s appeals against these judgments, ruling that the prosecution had failed to prove Koli’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The top court also noted that the earlier recoveries of weapons and other incriminating materials during the investigation lacked the proper legal basis and could not be relied upon.

The curative petition, which concerned the last case in which the Supreme Court had upheld Koli’s conviction and death sentence in 2011, became the focus of the final phase of judicial scrutiny. The Allahabad High Court had commuted this sentence to life imprisonment in 2015, citing undue delay in the disposal of Koli’s mercy petition. With Tuesday’s ruling, even this last conviction was set aside, allowing Koli to finally walk free, provided he is not wanted in any other matter.

During the hearing of the curative petition in October, the bench had reminded Additional Solicitor General Raja Thakare, representing the CBI, of the State’s responsibility to assist the court fairly and impartially. The CJI remarked, “As a solicitor, we expect you to be an officer of the court,” when Thakare attempted to distinguish the pending case on minor factual nuances. This pointed exchange highlighted the judiciary’s insistence on procedural fairness and the need for reliable, admissible evidence before imposing life-altering penalties.

The Supreme Court’s verdict on Tuesday marks a rare instance of the apex court overturning its own earlier decisionthrough the extraordinary curative jurisdiction. While curative petitions are seldom granted, the court’s willingness to intervene in this case underscores the gravity of ensuring justice is not compromised by technicalities or procedural lapses. The ruling sets an important precedent for handling cases involving complex evidence, multiple connected proceedings, and alleged miscarriages of justice.

The Nithari case itself has left a lasting impact on India’s criminal justice system and public consciousness. The disturbing nature of the alleged crimes, the alleged involvement of a domestic worker in facilitating sexual assault and murder, and the purported cannibalism allegations led to intense media scrutiny and public outrage. The case prompted debates on police accountability, forensic investigations, victim protection, and the admissibility of confessions and recovered material in criminal trials.

Over the years, legal experts have pointed out several flaws in the investigation, including unreliable witness statements, procedural lapses in evidence collection, and inconsistent testimonies. The Allahabad High Court and, later, the Supreme Court, emphasized that such flaws significantly undermined the prosecution’s case, leading to acquittals. The curative petition judgment further reinforces the principle that convictions must rest on solid, admissible, and verifiable evidence, and that procedural errors cannot be overlooked, especially in cases carrying the death penalty or life imprisonment.

With the Supreme Court’s acquittal of Surendra Koli, nearly two decades of litigation in the Nithari killings saga has formally come to an end. The verdict not only brings closure to Koli himself but also signifies the judiciary’s commitment to rectifying potential miscarriages of justice, even in the most high-profile and sensitive criminal cases.

The case remains a stark reminder of the challenges faced by the Indian criminal justice system, particularly in handling cases with sensational media coverage, public pressure, and complex forensic evidence. It underscores the need for thorough, transparent, and accountable investigative processes, especially when the stakes involve human lives and long-term imprisonment.

In conclusion, Tuesday’s judgment by the Supreme Court marks the end of Surendra Koli’s nearly twenty-year-long legal ordeal. By acquitting him in the last standing case, the apex court has reaffirmed the principles of fair trial, procedural correctness, and evidentiary reliability, emphasizing that justice must prevail over past errors or incomplete investigations. The Nithari case, infamous for its horror and complexity, will now also be remembered for the judiciary’s insistence on fairness and the rigorous application of legal standards, ensuring that no individual is wrongfully deprived of liberty without incontrovertible proof.