Srinagar: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has acquitted two persons convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in a 2013 murder case from Kulgam, holding that the prosecution failed to establish an unbroken chain of evidence proving their guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
A Division Bench comprising Justices Sanjay Dhar and Sanjay Parihar allowed the criminal appeals filed by Ali Mohammad Dar and Mst Muzamilla, the wife of the deceased overturning the judgment of the Principal Sessions Judge, Kulgam, which had convicted them under Section 302 RPC for the murder of Abdul Rashid Dar of Modergam.
The case pertained to the death of Abdul Rashid Dar, whose body was found hanging from a tree in an orchard on December 21, 2013. Investigators had alleged that Muzamilla, the wife of the deceased, and Ali Mohammad Dar were involved in an “illicit relationship” and had conspired to eliminate the victim before staging the death as a suicide.
According to the prosecution, the deceased was first administered sedative tablets, rendered unconscious, and then killed. His body was allegedly taken to an orchard and suspended from a tree to make it look like a case of suicide.
The prosecution relied heavily on disclosure statements allegedly made by the accused while in police custody, as well as recoveries of certain articles, including a scarf, a glass and strips of medicine.
The trial court had accepted the prosecution version and sentenced both the accused to life imprisonment, while also imposing a fine of Rs 3 lakh on Ali Mohammad Dar.
However, after examining the evidence, the High Court found “significant deficiencies in the prosecution case”. The Bench observed that the alleged confessional statements made before police officers were legally inadmissible except to the limited extent permitted under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.
The court noted that several witnesses admitted during cross-examination that police had already informed them about the alleged involvement of the accused, raising concerns about the independence and reliability of their testimonies.
The Bench also found that the recoveries relied upon by the prosecution were weak and inconclusive, as the articles were recovered from ordinary locations rather than from any place exclusively known to the accused.
Medical evidence, the court said, did not support key aspects of the prosecution theory. No sedative substance was detected in the viscera examination, despite allegations that the victim had been drugged before the murder.
Further, the court observed that there was no direct evidence placing Ali Mohammad Dar at the deceased’s house on the night of the occurrence, nor was there any “last seen” evidence connecting either accused to the crime.
While acknowledging that Abdul Rashid Dar had met a homicidal death, the High Court stressed that suspicion, however strong, could not substitute proof. It held that the prosecution failed to establish a complete chain of circumstances linking the accused to the crime.
Consequently, it set aside the convictions and sentences, acquitted both appellants of all charges, and directed their immediate release if not required in any other case. The reference for confirmation of the sentence was also answered accordingly.
