Prayagraj, 08 October: The Allahabad High Court acquitted the accused, who had spent 17 years in jail, giving the benefit of the doubt. The court said that there are several discrepancies in the judgment of the trial court, which renders the entire investigation questionable. Therefore, the accused is entitled to benefit of doubt.
A bench of Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan and Justice Mohammad Azhar Hussain Idrisi gave this order on an appeal against the sentence of accused Mahfooz. A case was registered against Mahfooz and Muddu in the Kotwali of Kannauj for the murder of Dinesh. Alleged that on October 19, 2006, Dinesh was returning home with his brother after selling fish. Meanwhile, the accused Mahfuz and Muddu stopped both of them on their way and demanded money. When Dinesh refused, Muddu caught him and Mahfuz shot him with the pistol he was holding. He died from this. Dinesh’s brother (complainant) claimed to have witnessed the entire incident himself.
It is also alleged that villagers gathered at the spot and tried to arrest Muddu, in which Muddu sustained minor injuries. Later Muddu died. In this incident, a case was registered on the death of Dinesh, but no case was registered by the police on the death of the accused. In May 2013, the trial court, while hearing the case, convicted the accused Mahfooz of Dinesh’s murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment. Mahfooz challenged it in the High Court.
The lawyer argued that Dinesh and Muddu had died in this case. Despite this, an FIR was registered only for Dinesh’s murder. The police did not register an FIR to protect the complainant and eyewitnesses. It also said that there were contradictions in the statements of the two witnesses.
The court, after hearing the lawyers of the parties and observing the evidence, said that there are contradictions in the statements of the witnesses. The court said that the prosecution failed to explain why no FIR was registered in connection with the murder of the appellant’s brother Muddu. The appellant was arrested one year after the incident. No weapon was recovered from him. The police did not recover any empty cartridges from the spot.
The court said that the autopsy Dr Narendra Kumar said that he first conducted the post-mortem of Muddu and then of Dinesh. This raises suspicions that Muddu was killed before Dinesh was killed. Muddu was beaten to death by the mob on the spot. Since there is no FIR or investigation after this, it is clear that the police did not conduct a proper investigation. Therefore the benefit of doubt should be given to the appellant. The Court allowed the appeal and set aside the order of conviction and sentence.
