Srinagar: A local court in Srinagar convicted Javid Ahmad Bhat under Section 302 RPC for strangulating to death his wife in June 2014 in the central Kashmir district of Badgam on Saturday.
Giving case history, an official spokesman said on June 3, 2014 Police Station, Khansahib received information from reliable sources that the body of a woman identified as Gulshan Akhtar is lying in Kremshore and by appearance it looks that she has been killed by strangulation.
On receipt of the said information, case FIR was registered under Section 302 RPC and investigation was started.
During investigation, site plan was prepared and the body was taken into possession by police, photography was conducted, at the place of occurrence some blood stained grass was collected with the help of FSL team for the purposes of chemical examination. One blanket was also seized which was used to cover the body.
The body was taken to hospital -for post-mortem, where clothes were seized and one blood stained scarf was also seized. After post-mortem the body was handed over to legal heirs for last rites. The blood stained grass and scarf was sent to FSL for chemical examination. The statements of witnesses vis-à-vis the seizure were recorded, the order reads.
He said the order mentions that the trial court examined 21 witnesses.
After hearing Qazi Qayoom, learned Public Prosecutor (PP) and counsel for the accused, the Principal Sessions Judge Srinagar Abdul Rashid Malik observed that the prosecution has cogently and firmly established the circumstances from which the inference of guilt can be drawn.
The circumstances are definite and unerringly point out towards the guilt of the accused. The circumstances cumulatively form the chain, so complete that there is no other explanation of any other hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused and the evidence is consistent with the guilt of the accused and inconsistent with his innocence.
After the deceased left the home she was not seen by anybody and later on after two days her body was found on the spot of occurrence and the accused in the disclosure statement has explained the circumstances which left no doubt in the mind of this court that it was the accused who has committed the murder of the deceased.
The Police had no reason to falsely implicate the accused and the accused has failed in examination under Section 342 CrP0 to explain the incriminating circumstances because once the prosecution has discharged the burden of proof, the accused cannot chose to remain silent as adverse inference can be drawn.
The accused has not explained his constant contact with the deceased, the knocking of the windows, providing the mobile phone to the deceased, motivated the deceased to come out of the home, the conversation with the deceased and recovery of the incriminating articles from the possession of the accused.
There is no doubt that mere recovery of the incriminating articles is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused but the recovery is supported by the detailed disclosure statement made by the accused before the Investigating Officer in presence of the Executive Magistrate and the Deputy Superintendent of Police . There is not even an iota of evidence that the accused was wrongly implicated.