New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued notice to the state of Maharashtra on a plea seeking compensation for wrongful conviction and incarceration of a man who spent 12 years in prison, including six years on death row, before being acquitted earlier this year.

Bench Seeks Centre’s Assistance

A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta sought responses from the Maharashtra government on the writ petition filed by Ramkirat Munilal Goud, who was acquitted by the apex court on May 7, 2025.
The court also issued notices to the Attorney General and Solicitor General of India to assist in the matter, given its constitutional and legal significance.

The Bench further tagged Goud’s case with two similar petitions filed by former death-row convicts — Kattavellai alias Devakar and Sanjay — who have also sought compensation for wrongful imprisonment.

12 Years Behind Bars, 6 on Death Row

Goud’s petition, filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, narrates a harrowing account of wrongful arrest, fabricated evidence, and a tainted investigation that led to his conviction by a Special POCSO Court in Thane on March 5, 2019.
His death sentence was confirmed by the Bombay High Court on November 25, 2021, before the Supreme Court overturned the verdict in May 2025, citing serious lapses by investigating authorities.

Apex Court’s Strong Observations on Police Conduct

While acquitting Goud, the Supreme Court made scathing observations on the conduct of the police and prosecution, holding that key witnesses were “created by the investigation agency for ulterior motive.”

The Bench had also noted that Goud was illegally arrested on October 3, 2013, observing:

“There was no material on the investigation file to even cast a minimal suspicion against the accused. The Investigating Officers did not possess the barest evidence which could have pointed a finger of suspicion towards the appellant.”

Life After Release

According to the plea, Goud was released on May 19, 2025, after spending 12 years in prison without parole or furlough.
His petition reveals that upon returning home, he found his family living in a makeshift house with plastic sheets as a roof, having sold their land and jewellery to fund his legal battle.

“The Petitioner’s children had never been able to visit him in prison,” the plea stated.
“He lost the prime years of his life due to a wrongful conviction induced by an unlawful and tainted investigation.”

Violation of Fundamental Rights

Goud’s legal team argued that his ordeal constituted a gross violation of his fundamental rights under Article 21 — the right to life and personal liberty.
They contended that the State must be held strictly liable for the illegal investigation, unfair prosecution, and fabrication of evidence that led to his wrongful conviction.

“The mere release of the individual from incarceration is not sufficient to correct the wrong faced by him,” the petition stated, urging the court to direct the Maharashtra government to pay compensation for both pecuniary and non-pecuniary harm.

The petition was filed by advocates Mihir Samson and Yash S. Vijay, in association with Square Circle Clinic, NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad.
Senior advocate Gopal Subramanium appeared for Goud, while senior advocates Gopal Sankarnarayanan and Anitha Shenoy represented the two other petitioners.

This case could mark a significant development in India’s jurisprudence on wrongful convictions, as the Supreme Court examines state liability and compensation for miscarriages of justice — an area with limited precedent in Indian law.