A 50-year-old cold theft case has finally seen its judicial closure in a Mumbai court after the accused was released, and the amount quoted as recoverable was deposited back or transferred to government custody. Spotlight attempts to solve cold cases that have lingered for years.
Introduction: A Half-Century Pending Case
In a development that may only happen in India, a Mumbai court has now—43 years later—closed the theft case, involving an amount as little as Rs7.65 (a whopping second-hand material value of ₹10, which the people involved actually didn’t even use), with approximately what may be equated to “The Wheels of Justice” finally turning clean-off from the vehicle they support so shamelessly.
The case had lingered for close to five decades, symbolizing delays in India’s judicial system. The amount is modest, but the ruling underscores the judiciary’s push to close long-languishing cold cases and provide closure, however belated.
The Details of the Rs7.65 Theft Case
The theft, which was estimated at Rs 7.65 (USD 2) reportedly took place in 1977 and was committed by two unknown persons who made away with it. Back then, that amount was modest but meaningful. A case under section 379 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which pertains to theft, was registered.
The filing of the initial case, however, was not followed by any further action. For more than half a century, the alleged victim and accused could not be located, with law enforcement unsure how to proceed. Even though offenses of minor theft and other such cases could be tried in a summary manner under Section 260 of the CrPC, the absence of any takers meant little headway was made.
Why the Case Took Decades to Be Heard
There were several factors behind this decades-long delay:
- Untraceable parties: During numerous efforts made over time, the accused and the complainant could not be traced.
- Small change, low priority: Courts often end up treating more serious criminal or civil cases as a higher priority than petty cash amounts.
- Judicial backlog: Indian courts are handling millions of cases, and minors sometimes go for years without their cases coming to court.
Add those together, and the Rs7.65 theft became a textbook cold case that lingered for nearly half a century.
Court’s Hard-hitting Decision To Close The Matter
On 14 January 2026, Judicial Magistrate First Class Aarti Kulkarni of a court in Mazagaon formally closed the case. The issue had dragged on long enough, she said, and there was “no point keeping it pending further.” The court emphasized that keeping such a case languishing hinders the timely delivery of justice. As part of a concerted effort to close decades-old cold cases and streamline case management in Indian courts, the closure is long overdue.
The court’s decision resulted in a few important outcomes:
- Both defendants were officially cleared of all charges, thus removing any legal action against them.
- The Rs7.65 in the case will be refunded to the complainant as and when found, they added.
- “If the complainant is untraceable, the money will be deposited in a government account.”
Wider Implications for the Indian Judiciary
Although this may come across as a minor case, it encapsulates several key trends in the judiciary:
- Clearing backlog: Delayed files are now being revisited to solve years-old cases.
- Judicial efficiency: Getting rid of these inactive cases redirects resources to verify and enforce claims that are functioning and immediate.
- Legal protection against petty crimes: There are concepts like the summary trial under the CrPC, but they depend on complainants and witnesses who have to participate.
Conclusion: Justice, Though Delayed, Delivered
The closure of this nearly half-a-century-old theft case symbolizes the Indian judiciary’s preparedness and sincere efforts to revisit, clean up, and resolve cases that have gathered dust. While $20 of cash at stake was not a big deal, it is about accountability and closure as to old handloading cases out there. By exonerating the accused on record and maintaining that the stolen amount had to be correctly accounted for, a precedent has been laid down in efficient case management with an underlying message that justice need not be perpetually delayed—even in petty matters.
