New twist in Saif Ali Khan case: 19 out of 20 fingerprints don’t match main accused

In a dramatic turn of events in the high-profile Saif Aali Khan case, forensic evidence has raised fresh questions about the involvement of the prime accused, Mohammad Shariful Islam.

According to the recently submitted chargesheet, 19 out of 20 fingerprint samples collected from the crime scene do not match Shariful's prints, despite previous claims of solid evidence against him.

Mumbai Police submitted a voluminous chargesheet—spanning over a thousand pages—to the Bandra Metropolitan Magistrate's Court on 8 April.

The document outlines testimonies, forensic reports, and digital evidence purportedly linking Shariful to the murder of actor Shehzad Saif.

The chargesheet, now accessed by media outlets, contains bombshell revelations that could shift the direction of the investigation.

Shariful, a 30-year-old man, had earlier applied for bail—a request Mumbai Police strongly opposed, citing multiple pieces of incriminating evidence.

But a new forensic report has cast doubt over the prosecution's claims. Fingerprint samples were collected from several locations within the actor's Bandra apartment, including bathroom handles, wardrobes, and doors. Shockingly, only one fingerprint out of twenty matched with the accused.

The rest did not correspond to Shariful's prints.

The CID's Fingerprint Bureau handled the analysis, revealing that 19 samples failed to match any of Shariful's fingerprints.

Police now claim that the unmatched prints could belong to others who were present at the scene, suggesting that Shariful's prints may have been overwritten or wiped off during the course of events.

"Such discrepancies are not uncommon in investigations," a senior police officer stated. "Often, only one in a thousand fingerprints lead to a conclusive match. However, the one fingerprint retrieved from the eighth-floor room directly links the accused to the scene."

The chargesheet also delves into Shariful's financial dealings, alleging he was involved in illegal money transfers to Bangladesh. Police claim that Shariful sent money to his family through an associate named Abdul Alim—his brother-in-law—using his assistant, Amit Pandya, as a conduit. These transactions were reportedly routed via a bank account in Bengaluru, raising suspicions of cross-border financial misconduct.

Further details reveal that the police recorded statements from 48 individuals out of 111 potential witnesses.

Notably, it has been claimed that Shariful remained inside the building—Sadguru Sharan Bhavan—for nearly an hour even after stabbing the victim. He was later seen leaving through the neighbouring Bharti Villa.

This startling twist has sparked speculation: was Shariful truly the mastermind behind Saif's murder, or is someone else pulling the strings? With growing gaps in forensic alignment and the complexity of financial trails, the case appears far from closed.

Legal analysts suggest that this new development could open the door for the defence to challenge the credibility of the evidence presented. Whether the prosecution can still build a watertight case remains to be seen.

The investigation continues.