Mumbai, Apr 28 (PTI) Actor Jiah Khan’s death was suicidal and the prosecution has “miserably” failed to prove its case that her then boyfriend Sooraj Pancholi had abetted her suicide, a special CBI court said on Friday acquitting Pancholi.
Special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court judge A S Sayyad said the evidence against Pancholi was “vague and general” and no specific overt act or role can be attributed to him to reflect active abutment.
The court also said Jiah could have walked out of the relationship but she was a victim of her sentiments and could not overcome her emotions, holding that Pancholi cannot be held “responsible” for this.
Jiah (25), a US citizen, was found dead at her Juhu home here on June 3, 2013. Her actor boyfriend Pancholi was arrested and booked for abetting her suicide. He was released on bail in July 2013.
The CBI court in its order also noted that Jiah’s mother Rabia Khan “destroyed” the case by making statements that contracted the prosecution.
“The prosecution has utterly failed to provide sufficient, cogent and dependable evidence to establish the ingredients of section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (abetment to suicide) against the accused,” the court said in its order.
It added that there was absolutely no evidence to show that on June 3, 2013, Pancholi had acted in any manner that would reflect mens rea (intention) that he wanted her to end her life. The court noted that on the date of the incident, Pancholi had not even met Jiah.
“The prosecution has further failed to prove that there was any action on the part of the accused which compelled the deceased to commit suicide. Therefore, in the absence of any mens rea, instigation or aid it cannot be said that the accused had driven her to commit suicide on that day,” the order said.
“No doubt, it is an unfortunate incident that a young girl committed suicide. However, the available evidence reflects that the deceased was a victim of her sentiments and she could not overcome her emotions. The deceased could have walked out of the relationship,” the court said, holding that Pancholi cannot be held “responsible” for this.
The court added that while the deceased’s mother Rabia has been claiming that her daughter had not committed suicide but was in fact murdered by the accused, medical evidence says otherwise.
It added that the medical evidence does not suggest homicidal hanging and it is suggestive of hanging by suicide.
“The prosecution evidence supported by medical evidence including the post-mortem report makes it clear that Jiah Khan died due to hanging. Jiah Khan met with a suicidal death,” the court said.
Judge Sayyad also noted that Rabia’s evidence handicapped the prosecution’s case against Pancholi.
“Rabia through her evidence tried to show that Jiah never committed suicide and that she was killed by the accused (Pancholi). However, this is not the case of the prosecution,” the court said in its order.
Rabia, being the complainant, was the main and crucial witness of the prosecution, but she openly showed distrust in the prosecution.
“When the case of the prosecution was of suicide, Rabia kept claiming that it was murder. By giving such openly contradictory evidence the complainant herself destroyed the case of the prosecution,” the court said.
It added that despite statements of medical experts that the death was because of suicide, Rabia raised doubt on everyone including the prosecution and the medical experts.
The court also raised doubts about the delay on Rabia’s part in getting the FIR registered.
“There is no plausible explanation given by Rabia as to why in the six days after the death of Jiah, she had not directly lodged FIR against the accused. The said delay creates doubt about the credibility of the complaint. The unexplained delay is fatal to the prosecution’s case and consequently the case of the prosecution comes under the shadow of doubt,” the court said.
The court in its order also noted that Jiah was depressed and unhappy with her professional growth. “It cannot be ignored that the deceased had suicidal tendencies and had on an earlier occasion attempted to commit suicide,” the court said.
The court noted that there was no evidence to show that Pancholi had forced Jiah to terminate her pregnancy. It added that the conduct of the deceased on some occasions show that she was “extremely obsessive and possessive” about Pancholi.
The court also raised doubts on the purported suicide note recovered from Jiah’s residence.
The court also said Rabia’s conduct of getting her second daughter engaged a few days after Jiah’s suicide does not seem like that of a normal person as she celebrated such a programme despite being in grief.
Rabia was aware that Pancholi and her daughter had differences but she at the relevant time never complained before anybody, the court said. Similarly, the deceased also did not take the name of Pancholi before anybody regarding the “ill-treatment” as alleged by Rabia, it added. PTI AVI SP NR
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.