Acquits Doctor Accused Of Abetting Wife Suicide In 2004

Srinagar: A court here has acquitted a doctor who was charged with abetting suicide of his wife in 2004, underling that an accused cannot be convicted on the basis of halfcooked story of the prosecution.
As per police’s charegsheet, on 05 September 2004, police was informed that at first floor of house at Indira Nagar, one person namely Dr. Kumail Murtaza was residing along with his wife and children as a tenant. It was further reported that 1-2 days ago Dr. Murtaza after altercation with his wife left the house with his two children. On this report, then SHO alongwith ASI Gurmukh Singh alongwith Escort party reached the spot and opened the bolt of the door from inside and entered the room and found that one woman lying on the double bed in the room. Her mouth was closed and foam in huge quantity was oozing out from her nose. Besides this one half filled bottle of “Novan”, one plastic mug, one disposable syringe, two glass tumblers, one Diary, two ball pens, bunch of keys, one executive diary, an empty envelope and some photocopies were lying near the dead body, chargehsete read.
Subsequently, after medico-legal formalities, police handed over body to Dr Murtaza for performance of last rites. During inquiry seized material was handed-over to FSL for chemical examination, police in the chargesheet said further. During investigation accused Dr. Kumail Murtaza was arrested on 17 September 2004 who was ultimately bailed out by the court.
“Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case….. in my opinion although death of the victim has been caused under some mysterious circumstances but every death under mysterious circumstance cannot be presumed to be a suicide unless there is some direct or indirect evidence to that extent,” said 3rd Additional Sessions Judge Srinagar, Sudhir Kumar Khajuria.
“In case for the offence u/s 306 RPC(IPC) not only factum of suicidal death is to be proved but abetement by the accused in the commission of suicide has also to be proved,” the court said, adding, “In a case where prosecution actually stands on the basis of circumstantial evidence responsibility/onus to prove the allegations becomes more important. An accused cannot be convicted on the basis of halfcooked story of the prosecution.”
It is the basic principle of criminal prejudice that in order to get the conviction prosecution has to prove its case beyond any reasonable doubt, the court said.
“In the present case in my opinion nothing incriminating has been brought on record against the accused so far as offence u/s 306 RPC is concerned,” the court said and acquitted the accused.

KR Desk