Father Sentenced to Life for Stabbing Son Over Step-Mother Dispute | Mumbai News – Times of India

MUMBAI: Taking note of the apathy of bystanders and neighbours who failed to intervene as a man from Dongri was stabbed with a pair of scissors by his father, a sessions court on Monday convicted and sentenced the 49-year-old parent to life imprisonment for murdering the 20-year-old victim in 2018 for refusing to call his stepmother “ammi” (mother).
Finding the accused, Salim Ali Shaikh alias Madrasi, guilty of murdering Imran Shaikh, Judge S D Tawshikar said that it was really a matter of concern that though the incident took place about 9.30 pm in a crowded area of the city, no individual volunteered to provide information to the investigating officer.
“The act of the mother running to the police station to seek police help shows her helplessness and the apathy shown by neighbours and bystanders to provide timely help to the deceased. This shows the falling standard of our society and the careless attitude towards such a serious incident,” the judge said.
Imran’s biological mother, Parveen Shaikh, told the court that she named the father as an accused out of anger and that her son was under the influence of drugs and stabbed himself. She also claimed that after her son started fighting with the accused, she rushed to the police station. The judge noted that her testimony about self-infliction of injuries seemed unreliable and an attempt to save her husband. Dubbing her an unfortunate woman, the judge said, “She seems to be stuck in an emotional dilemma. On one hand, she has already lost her child, and on the other hand, her husband is in danger of getting punished for committing the murder of their son. Hence, she tried to depose a few things falsely.”
Refuting the defence of the accused that he was falsely implicated, the judge noted the accused was the father of the victim, yet he showed no sympathy towards him. “After the assault, he seems to have run away from the spot. The lady who assisted the police in taking the injured to the hospital is reported to have died during the pendency of the trial. Records reveal that the accused was neither present on the spot after the incident nor visited the hospital. This unnatural conduct of the accused also needs to be taken note of,” the judge said.
The judge emphasised the brutality of the crime, stating that the use of a sharp weapon like scissors indicated a deliberate and cruel act. The father, who had a history of conflict with his son, argued that the killing was a result of sudden rage. The court rejected this claim, citing the severity of the attack and the father-son relationship.
While the prosecution sought the death sentence, the judge reasoned that the maximum punishment could not be awarded. “Though the prosecution is right in saying that causing the murder of one’s own son is in itself a rarest of rare case, however, this does not fit in the ‘rarest of rare’ category carved out by the apex court,” the judge said.
Among the eleven witnesses cited by public prosecutor Ajit Chavan were also two eyewitnesses who attempted to break the first fight between the father and son. They did not fully support the prosecution’s case. Referring to their evidence, the judge said, “The cumulative effect of the deposition of these three witnesses unerringly establishes that on the date of the incident there was a quarrel between the accused and deceased Imran. They were seen fighting. The accused was assaulting Imran. Thereafter, the deceased is found dead within a short time gap of 15 to 20 minutes. Thus, the theory of last seen together gets attracted here. The accused is unable to explain how the deceased got the injuries. It is not possible that somebody else would assault the injured in such a short time gap.”