State vs Jabed Jahangir (2014) 66 DLR 579

The fact of the case:

The case involves the accused Jabed Jahangir brutally killed his wife Ria while residing in Mim's house. He kept the dead body under the mattress in the room and left the house at noon keeping the room under lock. The owner of the house lodged the FIR in the local police station.

Issue of the case:

(1) The main issue is whether the death sentence passed on Jabed Jahangir should be upheld or not?

(2) Other issues include the admissibility of evidence, the credibility of witnesses, and the validity of the trial.

Arguments of the case:

(1) The Deputy Attorney General claims that Jabed Jahangir brutally killed his wife and that the prosecution has proven the murder charge beyond reasonable doubt.

(2) The prosecution also adds that the learned Druto Bichar Tribunal, Chittagong, rightly passed the death sentence which calls for no interference.

(3) The defense claims that the prosecution failed to prove the charge of the murder against convict appellant Jabed Jahangir beyond reasonable doubt.

(4) Also, he argued that the trial was held in absentia and the trial court did not comply with the provisions of sections 87 and 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Judgment of the case:

There is a saying that each and every murder must have a clue inadvertently left by the murderer. Similarly, Jabed Jahangir left his admit card in the house of occurrence, and after arrest, when he filed Jail Appeal No. 47 of 2010, he put his signature in the Vokalatnama. On careful examination, it appears that the signature of Vokalatnama and of the admit card are the same and identical. So, there is no doubt that the admit card belongs to the convict accused Jabed Jahangir. The accused are charged with section 302/201 of the Penal Code.

(1) The court examines the testimony of prosecution witnesses who testified in support of the death sentence.

(2) An autopsy confirms that the cause of death was injuries inflicted by Jabed Jahangir.

(3) The court considers the testimony of prosecution witnesses to be credible and sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court rejected the defense’s request to supplement the evidence.

(4) Considering the facts and circumstances and the evidence on record we find that the prosecution has been able to prove the charge of murder against convict appellant Jabed Jahangir beyond reasonable doubt and as such the death sentence is confirmed.

(5) The court concluded that the death sentence passed on Jabed Jahangir was justified and should be upheld.

 

Written by---
HT AL-AMIN KHAN
Department of Land Management and Law
Jagannath University, Dhaka