Agripada resident's murder conviction upheld by HC
The Bombay High Court has upheld conviction for murder and life imprisonment of an Agripada resident who killed a man for falling in love with his former love-interest.
The division bench of Justice VK Tahilramani and Justice Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi while upholding the lower court order, observed that though the case was based entirely on circumstantial evidence, accused Asgar Ali Mohammed’s role was proved beyond reasonable doubt.
The incident took place in November 2006 and the conviction and sentence by the Mumbai Sessions Court came in May 2008.
On the night of November 12, 2006, while Mansur was with a friend in Agripada area itself, Ali also joined them and started chatting with him. Around midnight, Mansur’s mother asked him to come home and sleep. But he said that he will sleep in the taxi on which they were sitting. Later, around 4.45am on November 13, a friend informed Mansur’s mother that he was lying in a pool of blood on the footpath.
Mansur’s mother and brother went to the spot and found that he had already succumbed to his injuries. They found a blood stained stone lying next to the body. Mansur’s brother immediately lodged a complaint against Ali.
During the trial the prosecution produced 14 witnesses including Mansur’s mother, brother, a friend and Shabnam. The court accepted their evidence and convicted Ali. Mansur approached the HC saying that the incriminating circumstances alleged by prosecution were not established by “cogent and reliable evidence” and that the chain of evidence was not complete.
The HC, however, went into the details of the evidence and dismissed Ali’s appeal. The evidence relied by HC showed that Ali was Mansur till very late in the night on the relevant time; Ali’s jeans had blood stains which matched with Mansur’s blood group; Shabnam had deposed that Ali had threatened to kill Mansur yet again while talking her on that very day but Mansur did not pay any heed to her warning and that medical evidence showed that Mansur’s death was possible by the stone found lying next to his corpse.
The court also believed the motive suggested by the prosecution – Ali getting jealous of Mansur because of Shabnam getting involved with him after Ali refused to marry her.
The division bench of Justice VK Tahilramani and Justice Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi while upholding the lower court order, observed that though the case was based entirely on circumstantial evidence, accused Asgar Ali Mohammed’s role was proved beyond reasonable doubt.
The incident took place in November 2006 and the conviction and sentence by the Mumbai Sessions Court came in May 2008.
According to the facts of the case mention in the HC judgement, Asgar Ali and Shabnam used to love each other, but since Ali refused to get married to Shabnam, she started developing friendship with one Asgar Mansur. This didn’t go down well with Ali and he made this very clear to Shabnam by shouting at her and threatening to kill Mansur.
On the night of November 12, 2006, while Mansur was with a friend in Agripada area itself, Ali also joined them and started chatting with him. Around midnight, Mansur’s mother asked him to come home and sleep. But he said that he will sleep in the taxi on which they were sitting. Later, around 4.45am on November 13, a friend informed Mansur’s mother that he was lying in a pool of blood on the footpath.
Mansur’s mother and brother went to the spot and found that he had already succumbed to his injuries. They found a blood stained stone lying next to the body. Mansur’s brother immediately lodged a complaint against Ali.
During the trial the prosecution produced 14 witnesses including Mansur’s mother, brother, a friend and Shabnam. The court accepted their evidence and convicted Ali. Mansur approached the HC saying that the incriminating circumstances alleged by prosecution were not established by “cogent and reliable evidence” and that the chain of evidence was not complete.
The HC, however, went into the details of the evidence and dismissed Ali’s appeal. The evidence relied by HC showed that Ali was Mansur till very late in the night on the relevant time; Ali’s jeans had blood stains which matched with Mansur’s blood group; Shabnam had deposed that Ali had threatened to kill Mansur yet again while talking her on that very day but Mansur did not pay any heed to her warning and that medical evidence showed that Mansur’s death was possible by the stone found lying next to his corpse.
The court also believed the motive suggested by the prosecution – Ali getting jealous of Mansur because of Shabnam getting involved with him after Ali refused to marry her.
