HC picks holes in prosecution case

Srinagar, Jul 5: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir High Court has acquitted a man accused of murdering his wife in Udhampur in 2012 after picking up holes in the prosecution case.

A division bench of Justice Justice Sindhu Sharma and Shahzad Azeem acquitted Maan Chand of Village Jakhed in District Udhampur after it noted serious flaws in the prosecution’s case that rendered the evidence unreliable and unworthy of sustaining the conviction.

In terms of a judgment and order dated 17.12.2015 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Udhampur, Chand had been convicted for commission of offence under Section 302( murder) of RPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for committing murder of his wife.

The prosecution case was that the accused Chand suspecting his wife of an extramarital affair attacked her with a sickle before setting her on fire using kerosene oil. An FIR was lodged at police station Basantgrah on the complaint filed by the brother of the deceased and the accused Chand was later arrested and charged with murder.

Subsequently, a charge-sheet was filed and the trial court convicted chand for murder.

In its decision, the High court noted discrepancies in the recovery and handling of the alleged murder weapons. The fingerprint expert admitted that clear fingerprints could not be lifted from the sickle due to its rough surface, contradicting the prosecution’s claim of fingerprint evidence linking the accused to the weapon, the court said.

Moreover, the bench observed that the post-mortem was conducted not at hospital but in a private house, allegedly due to public protest.

It also noted that a 22-day delay in issuing the medical report and the absence of expert confirmation linking the injuries to the seized weapons further weakened the case.

The High Court raised serious doubts regarding the sequence of events and the credibility of key witnesses, especially conflicting statements by the prime witness both in his initial complaint and during his courtroom testimony, especially regarding the position of the deceased at the time of the fire and the involvement of their 2½-year-old child.

“we are unable to concur with the findings of the trial Court, particularly when on every point under consideration we have noted deficiencies and flaws, which are staring at the heavy burden cast on the prosecution to prove the guilt beyond all shadow of doubt so as to rebut the presumption of innocence, which is a cornerstone of criminal jurisprudence, therefore, accused cannot be sent behind the bars by curtailing his liberty on the basis of such fragile prosecution evidence,” the bench said and allowed the appeal.