EX-TV anchor Suhaib Ilyasi acquitted of wife’s murder

NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE, SAYS HIGH COURT

NEW DELHI: The Delhi high court Friday acquitted former TV anchor and producer Suhaib Illyasi, who was earlier convicted by a trial court of murdering his wife, stating that it was not a case of homicide and the motive has not been established.

A bench of justice S Muralidhar and justice Vinod Goel overturned the trial court conviction. The trial court had convicted Illyasi on December 20, 2017, and awarded him life imprisonment for murdering his wife Anju Illyasi in January 2000.

However, the high court in its 112-page order said, “…the medical evidence does not conclusively prove that it is a case of homicide. Thus an important link in the chain of circumstances has not been proved by the prosecution. The forensic evidence does not link the accused to the killing of the deceased in the manner suggested by the prosecution. The motive for the crime too has not been established.”

On the intervening night of January 10-11, 2000, Anju had succumbed to stab injuries at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS). According to the

police, the couple had allegedly fought before her death. The autopsy report, however, couldn’t establish if it was a suicide or murder despite taking the

opinions from two medical boards.

An FIR was registered on the complaint of the Anju’s mother Rukma Singh, who had alleged that her daughter was harassed for dowry. The court charged Suhaib of culpable homicide not amounting to murder (304B, IPC) along with 498a, IPC.

Dissatisfied with the charges, the mother filed a plea in the trial court for framing additional charges under Section 302, IPC (murder). This was dismissed following which she challenged it in the Delhi high court which directed to add the additional charge of murder.

While setting Illyasi free, the bench said, “The report of the five-member medical board contains no specific reasons for the conclusion that the preponderance of evidence in this case points towards “commission of homicide”.

The numerous factual errors in the opinion reflect non-application of mind to the relevant material on record. A conclusion based on faulty analysis, erroneous or absent facts and with no cogent reasons does not inspire confidence, it said.

NO CHALLENGE TO ACQUITTAL UNDER SECTIONS 498A AND 304B IPC

The court said the prosecution did not challenge the findings of the trial court wherein the accused was acquitted of charges of dowry harassment and culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

It also said the prosecution did not challenge the findings of the trial court wherein testimonies of the mother and sisters of the deceased alleging that there was dowry demand from the accused were disbelieved.

DEATH NOT HOMICIDAL

The court said two of the three doctors who had conducted the autopsy had opined that the death was a suicide.

It also stated that the second post-mortem report given by the five-member board makes certain glaring factual errors.

It added that even the forensic reports could not help the prosecution prove that the death was homicidal.

LOOPHOLES IN TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT

The bench said the trial court appeared to have ventured into making surmises and conjectures forgetting that it had, earlier in its judgment, discarded the testimonies of Anju’s mother and sisters.

The bench also held that it would be too much to expect from the accused to have stopped his wife from stabbing herself.