Powered by
Sponsored by

'Want to complete degree and become a doctor': Chandresh walks out of jail after 14 years

The ex-medical student was serving jail term for a ‘crime he did not commit’

Chandresh Marskole coming out of Bhopal central jail after being acquitted by the High Court in a murder case Chandresh Marskole coming out of Bhopal central jail after being acquitted by the High Court in a murder case

Slight smile on his face, shielding himself from the camera flashes and diffidently parrying questions on the case that has elicited interest across the country, Chandresh Marskole, 36, an ex-medical student, walked out of the Bhopal central jail on Monday evening, after being incarcerated close to 14 years for a murder that the MP High Court recently said, he did not commit.

“I am very happy to be out. I want to complete my medical degree and become a doctor to fulfill the dreams of my parents,” was the only statement Chandresh made to the media persons waiting outside the jail for his release. Chandresh’s elder brother was there to receive him.

Chandresh has been in jail, first as undertrial and then as a convict from September 25, 2008 when he was formally arrested by Bhopal police in the murder of Shruti Hill, known to be his girlfriend. The court of Bhopal additional sessions judge had convicted him of the murder charge on July 31, 2009. 

However, on May 4, the MP High Court overturned the decision of the trial court and acquitted him of the murder charges, while ordering him to be set free. The High Court, in a rare order, also ordered the state government to pay a compensation of Rs 42 lakh to Chandresh holding that he had ‘wasted more than thirteen precious years of his life.’

When asked what he would do if the state government appealed in the Supreme Court against the HC order, Chandresh said he had full faith in the judiciary.

He, however, refused to answer any other questions, saying that he did not want to talk about the past and the case. When categorically asked who he thought killed Shruti and whether he wanted to say anything about why he was implicated by (prosecution witness) Dr Hemant Verma as mentioned by HC, Chandresh merely said “talk to my lawyer.”

About 480 kms away in Waraseoni of Balaghat district, Chandresh’s father Jugram expressed deep happiness at the release of his son. “His and our lives were thrown into turmoil and we have suffered a lot during these 13 years. Now his mother and I are very happy. We just want him to complete his degree and become a doctor. That has been our dream.”

Jugram said that he was not sure when Chandresh would come to his ancestral home as he might stay in Bhopal for some days or go to Indore with his friends. He also said that they had no knowledge about Shruti Hill, the murdered girl, till the time Chandresh was put in jail.

Chandresh was accused of killing Shruti Hill, known to be romantically linked to him, and the consequent disposal of the body at Pachmarhi in Hoshangabad district on September 19, 2008. Then a fourth year medical student of the Gandhi Medical College, Bhopal, Chandresh was charged with murder and disposing the body using an SUV belonging to his senior Dr. Hemant Varma.

In a crucial judgment on May 5, the double bench of judges Atul Sreedharan and Sunita Yadav held that “the case has been deliberately botched up and the Appellant (Marskole) falsely implicated to protect, perhaps, the actual perpetrators of the offence who may have been known to the higher echelons of the state police.’

The court made scathing remarks on the Bhopal police (investigating agency) and the lead trial court for the wrongful conviction of Marskole. 

The court pointed out gaps in the statements of key prosecution witnesses Dr Varma and his driver and also the failure of the police to investigate these gaps. The court also pointed out the likely proximity of Dr Varma with the then inspector general of police (IG) of Bhopal, Shailendra Shrivastava.

In a rare comment, the court said “the case reveals a sordid saga of manipulative and preconceived investigation followed by a malicious prosecution, where the police have investigated the case with the sole purpose of falsely implicating the Appellant and perhaps, deliberately protecting a prosecution witness who may have been the actual culprit.”

📣 The Week is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel (@TheWeekmagazine) and stay updated with the latest headlines