J&K HC Acquits Man Accused Of Killing Wife By Setting Bed Ablaze, Says It Was Unexplained Why He Didn’t Save His Son If He Was Present At Scene
The Jammu & Kashmir Excessive Court docket acquitted a person convicted for homicide, pointing to a number of shortcomings within the prosecution’s case, together with variations and contradictions within the preliminary report and testimony of key witnesses and conflicting accounts of the kind of weapons used, the way of assault, and nature of accidents.
The courtroom additionally expressed concern over the prosecution’s failure to handle why the accused, allegedly current throughout the fireplace, didn’t rescue his 2½-year-old son from the flames.
It noticed that “the trial Court docket’s failure to handle this side in its judgment overlooks the pure and highly effective paternal intuition,” referencing Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, highlighting the profound bond between guardian and little one.
A Bench of Justice Shahzad Azeem and Justice Sindhu Sharma whereas permitting the attraction famous many critical lapses and inconsistencies within the prosecution’s case, calling the proof “fragile” and “unworthy of reliance.”
The bench mentioning the discrepancies in restoration of the alleged weapon of offence and unexplained delay in sending the particular report back to the Justice of the Peace, autopsy carried out in a personal home with contradictory statements by the physician and the investigating officer.
It mentioned that the autopsy report was issued after a delay of twenty-two days with out clarification, elevating issues about its credibility and there was no examination of the weapon of offence by the medical professional, weakening the prosecution’s linkage between damage and weapon.
The courtroom additionally concluded that the contradictions as to the date and time of arrest of the accused and visits by cops to the crime scene and failure to provide essential prosecution witnesses with out legitimate cause closely weakens prosecution case.
The Court docket emphasised that the presumption of innocence is a cornerstone of legal jurisprudence, and the burden lies closely on the prosecution to show guilt past all shadow of doubt. On this case, the prosecution’s case was riddled with inconsistencies that failed to satisfy that commonplace.
The courtroom concluded that “the testimony of witness termed ‘sterling’ by the trial courtroom, loses its sheen in gentle of the obtrusive contradictions and can’t alone maintain a conviction.
BACKGROUND:
The accused as per prosecution was arrested after an FIR was lodged by the brother of the deceased, alleging that within the early hours of the identical day, the accused (husband of the deceased) brutally assaulted his spouse with a wood stick and sickle, poured kerosene oil, and set her and her bedding on fireplace, leading to her dying.
PW-1 escaped and knowledgeable others, however by the point they returned, the accused had fled. Police registered the FIR and carried out an in depth investigation, together with restoration of the homicide weapons, seizure of burnt supplies, and recording of witness statements.
The prosecution alleged motive of suspicion of extra-marital affair, and the accused was charged underneath Part 302 RPC. He denied the allegations and claimed false implication however led no protection proof.
APPEARANCE:
Anmol Sharma, Advocate for Petitioners
Raman Sharma, AAG with Ms. Saliqa Sheikh, Advocate for Respondent.
Case-Title: Maan Chand vs State, 2025
