SHC commutes death sentence of wife killer to life imprisonment

The Sindh High Court (SHC) on Wednesday dismissed the appeal of a murder case convict but commuted his death sentence to life imprisonment.

Appellant Farhan Ahmed was sentenced to death by a District Central additional district and sessions court for murdering his wife in New Karachi on October 24, 2013. According to the prosecution, the appellant had killed his wife Shaista on suspicion of having illicit relations with her brother-in-law Kamran.

The appellant’s counsel submitted that the entire case of prosecution was based on circumstantial evidence and there were numerous contradictions in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses. He said the appellant had confessed to the murder under coercion hence his confession could not be relied upon as the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond any shadow of doubt.

He said that prior to scene of occurrence or what prompted him to take life of his wife had remained a mystery; therefore, if the high court was not convinced of his innocence, his sentence be reduced to life imprisonment.

A deputy prosecutor general submitted that prosecution witness Fayaz Nabi, real father of the appellant, had no motive to implicate his own son in the case as the appellant had committed the murder of his wife and the prosecution proved its case. He, however, frankly conceded that it had not come on record what actually had happened just prior to the incident which compelled the appellant to take the life of his wife.

A division bench of the SHC comprising Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto and Justice Abdul Mobeen Lakho, after hearing the arguments of the case, observed that there were mitigating circumstances as admittedly there was no direct evidence in the case and motive of the incident had remained shrouded in mystery.

The high court observed that it was evident that the relation between the deceased and the appellant were normal before the night of the incident and the prosecution had not brought on record what had happened prior to the scene of occurrence or what prompted the appellant to kill his wife at night.

The bench observed that the motive of the murder was shrouded in mystery while the confessional statement of the appellant was also not recorded in accordance with the settled principles of the law. The high court observed that a single mitigating circumstance would be sufficient to put on guard the judge not to award the penalty of death but life imprisonment. The court upheld the conviction of the appellant in the murder case but commuted his death sentence into life imprisonment and dismissed his appeal.