'Blue Drum' Murder: Convicts Challenge Death Sentence in High Court
Muskan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla challenge their death sentence in the sensational Saurabh Rajput murder case, known as the Blue Drum case.
The chilling saga of the Saurabh Rajput murder case, which gripped Uttar Pradesh with its gruesome details, has taken a new legal turn. Muskan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla, the two individuals sentenced to death for the brutal killing, have approached the Allahabad High Court to challenge their conviction and the ultimate penalty.
The Horror of the 'Blue Drum'
The case, which became known as the "blue drum case" due to the macabre method used to hide the crime, originated in the Brahmpuri area of Meerut. According to the prosecution, after Saurabh Rajput was murdered, the culprits attempted to dispose of the body by placing it inside a blue plastic drum. To ensure the body remained hidden and undisturbed, they filled the drum with cement and concrete.
The shocking nature of the disposal method sparked widespread outrage and attention across the state once the crime came to light. Following a detailed investigation, the police arrested Muskan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla, leading to a trial in the Meerut district court.
The 'Rarest of Rare' Verdict
The legal proceedings in the lower court culminated in a severe judgment. On September 30, 2026, the District and Sessions Court in Meerut convicted both accused. Shortly after, on October 14, 2026, the court awarded them the death penalty, explicitly categorizing the murder as one of the "rarest of rare" crimes.
In addition to the capital punishment, the court:
- Imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 on each convict.
- Sentenced them for the destruction of evidence.
- Convicted them under Section 103(1), read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for murder, and Section 238(a) for destroying evidence.
The Appeal: Challenging the Evidence
Now, through a joint appeal filed by their legal team—including senior advocate Sushil Shukla and advocates Nidhi Trivedi, Ravitendra Pratap Singh Chandel, and Sandeep Kumar Dubey—the convicts are seeking a complete acquittal. They argue that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt.
Key Arguments Raised by the Convicts:
The appeal brings forward several technical and evidentiary contradictions to challenge the trial court's decision:
- Circumstantial Evidence: The defense claims the conviction was based solely on circumstantial evidence and that the trial court failed to properly evaluate legal principles before delivering the verdict.
- Witness Contradictions: The appeal points out discrepancies in witness statements regarding the purchase of the murder weapon, the cement, and the blue drum.
- Missing Proofs: They argue that crucial evidence, such as CCTV footage and valid purchase receipts for the materials used in the crime, was never produced in court.
- Procedural Lapses: The convicts highlight the absence of signatures from independent witnesses on recovery documents and alleged irregularities in the videography process.
- Electronic Evidence: The appeal mentions the non-availability of necessary certificates required to validate electronic evidence.
The matter is expected to be heard by a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court next week, where the court will decide whether the evidence holds up or if the "rarest of rare" verdict warrants a reversal.