‘Perverse error’: Karnataka High Court convicts man who burned six people

Days before the fire, Sharief threw an unidentified powder at the doctor’s house, according to a complaint that police did not act on.

Dr Amir Jaan, his daughters Rizwana Banu, 30, and Parveen Taaj, 26, and grandchildren Harbia Fathima, 8, and Mohammed Arahan, 2, and the doctor’s wife Afroz Begum, 60, died in the fire, while his daughter Reshma Banu survived with burns.

‘Gaps in investigation and forensic evidence’

After the police filed a chargesheet, the sessions court in Mysuru acquitted Sharief in April 2018, stating there was no sufficient material to convict him. Citing some gaps in the investigation and forensic evidence, the trial court also said the prosecution failed to prove the fire was deliberately set.

However, the high court held that the trial court had not adequately discussed the petroleum residue found on several items seized from the scene. It also said Sharief had not offered any explanation for the burns found on his body. Further, it pointed to the testimony of Sharief’s wife that he was absent at home at the time of the incident.

Trial court’s ‘erroneous and perverse approach’

The high court said, “The very approach of the trial court is erroneous and perverse when the accused did not explain regarding injuries found on him and the same is noticed by his wife…”

“When (Reshma) categorically deposed that it was the accused and also deposed with regard to the motive for committing the offence and the document is very clear that the accused had sustained the injuries and there was no explanation in the 313 statement, the trial court ought not to have given such finding,” the high court added.

The trial court also failed to consider the investigating officer’s statement that Sharief had burn marks on his face and that his hair was burnt at the time of his arrest, the bench said, adding that “the very approach of the trial court is erroneous”.

“This court comes to the conclusion that the trial court has committed an error in appreciating the evidence and the same amounts to perversity, which has led to miscarriage of justice and hence converted the acquittal to conviction,” the bench said.