Additional Sessions Judge Rajender Kumar Shastri refused to accept the motive, as touted by the prosecution, that Sharma was scared after Shivani threatened to expose his involvement in leaking classified documents to her while he was posted at the Prime Minister’s Office.

The court found no proof in this regard and held that even her husband, also a journalist, could procure the documents for his write-ups.

The testimonies of two material witnesses, Sevanti and Seijal Shah, were not held damning and admissible under the material provisions of the Evidence Act as their versions were found to be the hearsay accounts of what Shivani had told them about her relationship with Sharma. Their statements’ validity remained confined only to questioning the conduct of Sharma.

The motive on the part of Pradeep, who according to prosecution was roped in as the hired killer and was promised money and reinstatement in his job for carrying out the execution, could not be proved for lack of evidence. The court noted, “None of the said facts is established on record.”

While the prosecution claimed that Pradeep had gained entry in the scribe’s housing society after making an entry at its gate and produced a number of witnesses including the handwriting experts, the court threw out the contention saying, “It could not be proved on file that handwriting in this register was of Pradeep.”

The prosecution’s claim that R K Sharma was investing money in real estate through Sri Bhagwan was also not proved on record as the two witnesses brought by the prosecution denied that the latter was involved in their property matters.

The court also stated in its 115-page conviction order that the prosecution failed in furnishing sufficient explanation regarding two persons, Vasluddin and Lalit, who also had entries in the visitor’s register on January 23, 1999, the date of murder.