Delhi Court Convicts Man Of Killing Wife

The Delhi court has recently convicted a man of killing his wife by strangulating her, asserting that the circumstances leading to the crime have been “completely established.”

Furthermore, the court noted that the prosecution’s inability to demonstrate the husband’s motive doesn’t warrant the dismissal of their case. This is due to the fact that the entirety of the circumstantial evidence points, “in all human probability,” to the accused being the perpetrator of the murder.

Additional Sessions Judge Vishal Pahuja presided over the case involving Sadab, who was accused of strangling his wife, Sana, on September 29, 2017, in the Sangam Vihar area.

He stated in a judgment passed last week, “the circumstances establishing the guilt of the accused have been fully established.”

The judge stated that the evidentiary trail in this case was complete, leaving no reasonable grounds to conclude the accused’s innocence.

ASJ Pahuja stated, “The circumstances proved on record in this case show that in all human probability, it was the accused who had committed the murder of deceased Sana. In the considered view of this court, the circumstances are sufficient to form a complete chain that unerringly pointed towards the guilt of the accused.”

The judge stated that the prosecution had “successfully established” its case by providing “cogent evidence.”

“Accordingly, the accused stands convicted for the offence under section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code.”
The court scheduled the submission of affidavits for August 31, after which sentencing arguments will be heard.

The court dismissed the defense counsel’s contention regarding the prosecution’s failure to establish the accused’s motive for killing his wife.

Furthermore, the court stated, “When an offence like murder is committed in secrecy by the husband in a dwelling house, it will be difficult for the prosecution to establish what actually transpired between the husband and wife and what was his motive at that point in time to commit such crime.”

It opined the failure to prove the motive wasn’t fatal to the prosecution’s case “when other circumstances completed the chain to show that in all human probability, the act (of murder) must have been done by the accused.”