Last Updated:
The case pertains to the March 2025 killing of Muskan’s husband Saurabh Rajput within the Brahmpuri police station jurisdiction in Meerut
Muskaan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla were sentenced to death for the murder of Saurabh Rajput in the Meerut blue drum case. File image
Muskan Rastogi and her partner Sahil Shukla, convicted in the high-profile Meerut “blue drum” murder case, have filed a joint appeal in the Allahabad High Court challenging their conviction and the death penalty awarded by a trial court. Represented by a team of senior defence advocates, the appellants have urged the High Court to set aside the trial court’s capital punishment order and acquit them of all charges.
The appeal comes days after a Meerut district court sentenced both to death and imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 each for the murder of Muskan’s husbandformer merchant navy officer Saurabh Rajput, and for attempting to destroy evidence.
Defence Questions Reliance on Circumstantial Evidence
In their petition, the appellants argued that the trial court’s conviction verdict was illegal, arbitrary, and founded on speculation rather than established legal principles. They submitted that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, noting that the entire prosecution narrative rested solely on circumstantial evidence without direct eyewitness testimony.
The petition highlighted key material discrepancies in the trial record, pointing to “glaring contradictions” in witness statements regarding the purchase of the crime weapon, the blue plastic drumand the concrete mixture. Defence counsel argued that the police failed to produce critical corroborative proof, such as CCTV footage or valid store receipts, to verify these key transactions.
‘Procedural Flaws’ and Electronic Evidence Certificates Raised
The legal challenge also focuses heavily on alleged technical and procedural lapses during the police investigation. The defence contended that mandatory signatures from independent witnesses were missing from recovery memos, and established videography protocols were violated during search operations.
At A Glance
Muskan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla filed a joint appeal in the Allahabad High Court challenging their conviction and death penalty for the Meerut blue drum murder case.
A Meerut district court previously sentenced both convicts to death and imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 each for the murder of Saurabh Rajput and destruction of evidence.
The defence petition argues that the prosecution relied entirely on circumstantial evidence without direct eyewitness testimony or critical corroborative proof.
The appeal highlights procedural lapses, missing independent witness signatures on recovery memos, and the absence of statutory certificates for electronic evidence.
The case involves the March 2025 killing of former merchant navy officer Saurabh Rajput, whose body was placed in a plastic drum and filled with concrete.
Furthermore, the appeal emphasised the absence of statutory certificates required under evidence law to validate electronic records, rendering digital submissions legally unsustainable. Currently lodged in Meerut’s Chaudhary Charan Singh Jail, both convicts await a formal hearing before a division bench of the Allahabad High Court expected next week.
Grisly Murder Case That Shocked Meerut
The case pertains to the March 2025 killing of Saurabh Rajput within the Brahmpuri police station jurisdiction in Meerut. Following the murder, the duo allegedly packed the victim’s body into a large blue plastic drum and filled it with cement and concrete in a bid to conceal the crime and prevent decomposition.
The gruesome nature of the crime triggered widespread outrage across Uttar Pradesh, leading to a swift investigation and arrest. While the prosecution maintains that the death sentence is justified given the brutal execution and concealment, the High Court will now examine whether procedural flaws and evidentiary gaps warrant judicial interference.
Quick Answers
Ask News18In their joint appeal at the Allahabad High Court, Muskan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla argued that the trial court’s conviction verdict was illegal, arbitrary, and relied purely on circumstantial evidence without direct eyewitnesses. They also highlighted major contradictions in witness statements regarding the purchase of the crime weapon, the blue drum, and concrete mixture, alongside procedural flaws such as missing independent witness signatures on recovery memos and absent statutory certificates for electronic records.
Ask News18About the Author
Pathikrit Sen Gupta is a Senior Associate Editor with News18.com and likes to cut a long story short. He writes sporadically on Politics, Sports, Global Affairs, Space, Entertainment, And Food. He tra…Read More
October 25, 2026, 06:08 IST
Read More
Source link
[ad_3]
