Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

A Delhi Court on Monday adjourned until January 31 the hearing of arguments on sentencing three people convicted of killing professional photographer Ankit Saxena in February 2018 over an interfaith love affair.

Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Sunil Kumar Sharma of Tis Hazari Court convicted Akbar Ali and Shahnaj Begum, the parents of Saxena's girlfriend Shehzadi, and maternal uncle Mohammad Salim on December 23, 2023.

On February 1, 2018, Saxena was fatally stabbed in broad daylight by the family members of his female friend, with whom he had been in a relationship for three years. The woman's family had opposed the relationship, citing differences in their communities.

The ASJ convicted the female friend's parents, Akbar Ali and Shahnaj Begum, and the maternal uncle, Mohammad Salim, under Indian Penal Code (IPC) Sections 302 (murder) and 34 (common intention). Begum was additionally convicted of voluntarily causing hurt.

The court, in its 121-page judgment pronounced on December 23, 2023, concluded that the prosecution had proven beyond reasonable doubt that all the accused, in pursuit of their common intention, murdered Ankit Saxena.

"It can be safely concluded that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts against all the accused persons viz. accused A1 Mohd. Salim, accused A-2 Akbar Ali and accused A-3 Shahnaj Begum that all the aforesaid accused persons in furtherance of their common intention had committed the murder of deceased Ankit Saxena. Therefore, all the accused persons viz. accused A1 Mohd. Salim, accused A-2 Akbar Ali and accused A-3 Shahnaj Begum stand convicted for the charge of the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC.....the accused A-3 Shahnaj Begum also stands convicted for the charge of the offence punishable under Section 323 IPC," the judge ordered.

The court accepted the prosecution's version of the motive, stating that the family members were unhappy with the relationship between their daughter and the deceased.

Rejecting the defence counsel's argument on the reliability of prosecution witnesses, the court deemed their testimonies consistent and corroborated with other evidence.

"These witnesses have consistently elucidated what the accused persons viz. accused A-1, accused A-2 and accused A-3 did to the deceased and how they committed the alleged offence....Their testimony before the Court is contemporaneous to the alleged offence and are consistent on all material aspects that constitute the offence", the court said.

It dismissed the claim that the accused were not aggressors but were protecting their daughter or niece, asserting that the entire defence of the accused was "afterthought, tutored, and guided".

The court noted the woman's deposition, affirming the friendship between Ankit and her and their regular telephonic conversations. It emphasized that Ankit came to her rescue on the day of the incident, reflecting the depth of their friendship.

"On the date of incident also, according to DW-3 (the woman) her friend Ankit (deceased herein) came to her rescue. This also reflects the depth of their friendship as deceased Ankit Saxena was trying to help DW-3 when the same was allegedly required by her", the court noted.

Furthermore, the court stated that the relevant witnesses had not only testified that the deceased was killed by all the accused persons by silting his throat with a knife, but they had also testified about how the quarrel took place, the "exact language, words, and phrases" used by the accused persons, how the deceased was apprehended or caught by the accused persons, and how the throat of the deceased was cut by the accused persons with a knife.

Case Title: State v. Mohd. Salim & Ors.