Youth jailed for life for murder even as motive unclear
A fast track court has sentenced a 25-year-old youth to life imprisonment for stabbing to death a person even though the prosecution failed to impute any motive against him for committing the murder.
New Delhi: A fast track court here has
sentenced a 25-year-old youth to life imprisonment for
stabbing to death a person even though the prosecution failed
to impute any motive against him for committing the murder.
"The absence of motive in the circumstances of the
case cannot be said to affect the case of the prosecution.
Even otherwise, it is well settled law that motive cannot be
proved easily as it remains within the mind of the offender,"
Additional Sessions Judge Kaveri Baweja said while convicting
Jitender Kumar, who had charged with the murder of his
Jitender worked for a Patel Nagar resident Durgesh
Prasad, who manufactured music decks on the third floor of his
Durgesh had given the second floor of his house on
rent to the victim, who had been residing there for last 14
years along with his father.
The case against Jitender was lodged on a complaint by
Durgesh, who alleged that on April 9, 2004, Jitender came for
work in the morning but left after a while with a knife. He
went to Rizwan`s room and stabbed him in his chest.
Durgesh said he rushed to Rizwan`s room after hearing
his cries and found that he had been stabbed by Jitender, who
then dragged him to the staircase and threw him downstairs.
Durgesh added that he rushed Rizwan to the hospital
where he was declared brought dead.
Police later arrested Jitender and recovered his
blood-stained clothes at his instance. The forensic tests
showed that the clothes had Rizwan`s blood on them.
Another witness told the court that he had tried to
nab the accused as he ran towards the nearby park with a
blood stained knife in his hand.
Rizwan`s father Sikander Ali stated in the court that
his son did not have any dispute with Jitender.
The defence counsel contended that failure to impute
any motive to the accused shows that he was implicated
in the case.
The court rejected the defence argument saying the
guilt of the accused is proved on the basis of deposition by
the eye witness and other witnesses.