Murder case crumbles after 14 yrs
Excelsior Correspondent
DODA, Mar 25: Additional Sessions Judge Doda Archana Charak has acquitted accused in a 2011 alleged murder case, observing that the prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt and that the case appeared to be one of false implication.
The accused Mohd Ilyas Bhat and Mohsina (Marrina) Banoo, had been facing trial in connection with the death of Hafiza Begum of Dessa since 2011 and were lodged in District Jail Udhampur.
According to the prosecution, the case initially surfaced on February 4, 2011, when police at Dessa were informed that Hafiza Begum had allegedly died after consuming poison. Proceedings under Section 174 CrPC were initiated. However, during subsequent inquiry, the case took a dramatic turn, with investigators alleging that the deceased had been strangulated by the accused, who then attempted to portray the death as a case of poisoning.
The prosecution claimed that the deceased had confronted the accused over an alleged objectionable incident, following which they conspired to eliminate her. It was further alleged that on the night of February 3-4, 2011, the accused entered her house and killed her.
However, after a detailed trial and examination of witnesses, the court found serious inconsistencies and procedural lapses that severely weakened the prosecution’s case.
The court noted inordinate and unexplained delay in registration of FIR, absence of credible evidence, and failure of the sole alleged eyewitness to disclose material facts for nearly a month. These factors, the court observed, rendered the prosecution story doubtful and lacking credibility.
The court also highlighted contradictory and unreliable medical evidence. While one doctor initially termed the death as poisoning, another later suggested throttling, even admitting to overwriting observations. Crucially, medical experts conceded during cross-examination that no definitive opinion of strangulation could be given without examining the neck, which was never done.
Equally damaging was the inconsistency in the testimony of the alleged eyewitness, who gave conflicting versions during trial and earlier statements before the Magistrate. The court held that his testimony was unreliable and appeared to be false.
Rejecting the last seen theory and circumstantial evidence put forth by the prosecution, the court observed that there were missing links in the chain of events and that the motive, though suggested, remained unproven.
“Suspicion, however strong, cannot take the place of proof,” the court reiterated, emphasizing the settled legal principle that conviction cannot rest on conjectures.
Concluding that the prosecution had miserably failed to prove the charges, the court acquitted both accused of offences under Sections 302, 449 and 34 RPC, bringing an end to a 14-year-long trial marked by investigative deficiencies and evidentiary contradictions.
Follow our WhatsApp channel