Who is Ajay Dev
Ajay Dev immigrated to the United States from Nepal and built a life in Davis, California as a water engineer. In 1998, he and his wife Peggy adopted a teenage relative and brought her to live with them, giving her the opportunities of an American upbringing. He had no criminal record. To the people who knew him — dozens of whom would later testify — he was known for his integrity and compassion.
In early 2004, after a series of family conflicts, the accuser made allegations against Ajay. He was arrested, and in 2009 he was tried in Yolo County.
The trial: a cascade of errors
Ajay’s 2009 trial was an eight-week ordeal that ended in a 378-year-and-four-month prison sentence — a verdict that shocked the courtroom. There was no physical evidence, no witnesses to any crime, and no corroboration. The defense called more than thirty witnesses; not one contradicted Ajay’s character or credibility. Yet the jury convicted on 76 counts.
A close look at the record reveals how it happened: mistranslation, the exclusion of critical exculpatory evidence, the suppression of impeachment material, and prosecutorial overreach.
The pretext call: a translation catastrophe
Central to the prosecution was a 50-minute “pretext” phone call the accuser made to Ajay in February 2004, partly in English and partly in Nepali. Rather than relying on a court-certified translator, the court allowed the accuser herself — the complaining witness — to translate the Nepali portions.
Jurors later said the call was what convinced them to convict — even while acknowledging the accuser’s testimony had serious credibility problems. “If for her testimony alone, he would be a free man,” one juror wrote. “The phone call is what put him where he is now.”
But independent Nepali linguists testified the alleged confession was mistranslated — or non-existent. A phrase the accuser claimed meant an admission of sex was, in expert analysis, a vague statement about her coming to him when she was 18. As linguist Shakti Aryal put it, “There was no term equivalent to ‘sex’ used.” In the later habeas phase, enhanced forensic audio analysis confirmed the recording contained no sexual content and no admission of guilt.
The evidence the jury never saw
The defense sought to introduce certified Nepalese court documents showing the accuser had been convicted of passport fraud and perjury — evidence of both motive and a pattern of dishonesty under oath. Judge Timothy Fall excluded the documents over “authentication issues,” even though they carried the stamps and affidavits of Nepalese officials.
At the same time, the prosecution was permitted to portray Nepal’s justice system as untrustworthy, and to tell the jury the Dev family had manipulated it — with no evidence. Cross-examination into the accuser’s immigration history and inconsistent statements about her age was repeatedly cut short.
The appeal: hope raised and denied
Ajay’s appeal reached the California Third District Court of Appeal, which took the rare step of granting oral arguments in October 2016. Hundreds gathered outside the Sacramento courthouse in support. His appellate attorney laid out the mistranslated pretext call, the excluded Nepalese records, and prosecutorial misconduct in closing arguments.
In early 2017, the court acknowledged the trial court had erred by failing to instruct the jury that out-of-court statements need independent corroboration — but deemed the error “harmless” and upheld the conviction. For the family, it was a setback that only deepened their resolve. Ajay’s team immediately began preparing a habeas corpus petition.
The habeas fight: uncovering the truth
Unlike a direct appeal, a habeas petition allows new evidence. Over nearly seven years — drawn out by the pandemic, witness availability, and changes of counsel — Ajay’s team assembled it:
- Forensic linguistics using enhanced audio proved the “confession” never existed.
- Authenticated Nepalese court records, verified by sworn affidavits from Nepali legal officials, established the accuser’s fraud conviction and motive.
- New witnesses came forward — family, classmates, neighbors — with sworn declarations that the accuser had privately admitted fabricating the allegations. The defense also presented medical and school records that contradicted the pregnancy and abuse timeline.
- Documented prosecutorial threats against defense witnesses, including Ajay’s brother and wife, who were warned they could face charges if they testified.
The victory: Judge Beronio’s ruling
On May 17, 2025, Yolo County Superior Court Judge Janene Beronio granted the habeas petition, vacated the conviction, and ordered a new trial. She found Ajay’s trial counsel constitutionally deficient for failing to admit the authenticated Nepali records and to challenge the pretext-call translation. She found no credible evidence that the defense had fabricated anything — clearing the family of the DA’s conspiracy claims — and deemed key new witnesses credible and reliable.
“I believe he may be innocent,” Judge Beronio said from the bench.
Days later, Ajay was released on his own recognizance and returned home to Peggy and their two sons — free for the first time in sixteen years.
Case narrative summarized from public court records and reporting by the Davis Vanguard, CBS Sacramento, and The Washington Post. See Documents & Evidence for primary sources.