SHAHBUDDIN Vs. STATE NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order of conviction and sentence have been assailed primarily on three counts? firstly, the recovery of weapon doubtful; secondly the inference drawn by the learned Additional Sessions Judge that the appellant absconded after committing crime was without foundation, nor motive proved for the alleged crime; and finally prosecution failed to establish that the hair - recovered from the fist (muthi) of the deceased was that of the appellant.

(2.) Before we appreciate the challenge raised by the appellant, we may glance through the relevant facts. Deceased Bano was the sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the appellant. She was married to his brother Shabir. She had been living with her parents after her husband was involved in criminal case and sentenced. She had a son named Jahid from Shabir. Few months prior to this accident appellant brought her to Delhi from her parents house. She started residing in the house of Hasmat (PW-7) where appellant was also residing. On the fateful day i.e. 20/04/1995 she was found murdered in the basement of that house of Hasmat. Her throat had been cut. Hasmat (Pw-7) on getting the information that Bano had been murdered reported the matter to the police. Police seized broken bangles, chappal and bunch of black hair from her right hand fist(muthi). On the basis of the rukka recorded by Hasmat (Pw-7) case was registered.

(3.) Hasmat (Pw-7) informed the police that Bano had developed illicit relations with accused Shahbuddin as a result of which she became pregnant, when Shahbuddin was forced to marry her, he in order to get rid murdered her. Her throat was cut with an iron scrapper. Hasmat (PW-7) was running a shop of laith machine where the accused was also working. The iron scrappers are used in the laith machine, therefore, it was prosecution's case that accused Shahbuddin had access to iron scrapper with which he silenced Ms.Bano by cutting her throat. Further the said iron scrapper was recovered from the basement where murder took place. It was recovered at the pointing out of the accused. The hair recovered from the fist (muthi) of the deceased on examination by the CFSL were found to be that of the accused. He was, therefore, challanged under Section 302 Indian Penal Code.