[ad_1]
The court also said the planting of evidence by the police cannot be ruled out in the case.
Additional Sessions Judge Sachin Sangwan was hearing the case against Mohammed Sufiyan alias Romi, who was accused of killing Pooja Paswan in south Delhi on March 24, 2017.
According to the prosecution, the accused, who was known to the victim, stabbed her to death. It said the victim was single and used to stay at a rented house in Lajpat Nagar’s Amar Colony.
Underlining that the prosecution’s case was based on circumstantial evidence, the court examined the alleged facts, including the motive, presence of the accused at the spot, his conduct after the offence, recovery of stolen property and blood-stained clothes at his instance, and the forensic evidence.
It said the alleged motive of robbery was on a “weak footing” as according to the postmortem report, various jewellery items were found intact on the deceased’s body.
The court said the theory of murder after detailed preparation was not corroborated as neighbours reported the noise of a quarrel from the deceased’s house on the day of the alleged murder.
“Had it been the case of the prosecution that it was a murder due to a sudden quarrel then the circumstances may have fit the theory of prosecution,” it said in an order passed last week.
Regarding Sufiyan’s presence at the spot, the court said nothing much could be inferred from the call detail records and the electronic evidence was also on a weak footing.
“There is no direct evidence on record regarding the alleged suspicious conduct of the accused,” the court said adding, “The recovery of alleged blood-stained clothes at the instance of the accused is seriously doubtful.”
It said the accused’s motive to commit the robbery did not appear convincing if he did not encash the gold jewellery despite him being under financial restraint.
“Thus, the circumstances suggest that police had continued access to the crime scene and the belongings kept in the house of the deceased, during the investigation. Therefore, considering the overall circumstances, the planting of the jewellery from the house of the deceased cannot be ruled out altogether,” the court said.
It said when the recovery of blood-stained clothes itself was doubtful, then the DNA report was not of much significance.
“The prosecution has failed to prove all the incriminating facts mentioned in the charge sheet. Further, the facts proved during the trial are not sufficient to complete the chain of circumstantial evidence against the accused,” the court said.
Even the proven facts were not fully consistent with the guilt of the accused, it added.
“Accused is given benefit of doubt. Hence, he is acquitted of all the charges levelled against him,” the court said.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
[ad_2]
Source link
