On seeing him D4 Abdul Muthaliff abused the appellant in filthy language. Half an hour later, D4 Abdul Muthaliff came. The appellant waited for the arrival of D4 Abdul Muthaliff. the appellant went to the shop of D4 Abdul Muthaliff, when he was not there, but PW-4 Abdul Majeeth, his employee was available. D4 Abdul Muthaliff, as well put a second lock over the lock already put by the appellant in his room 8. One month later he came back to the house, when D4 Abdul Muthaliff demanded him to pay rent for one more month and asked him to take and remove the articles from his room only after such payment. But the appellant did not turn up as promised. The appellant assured that he would go to the village and after leaving the family at the village, he would come back within four days and vacate the room. As instructed by PW-1, D4 Abdul Muthaliff, returned the advance amount to the appellant. On the advise of PW-1, the appellant agreed to vacate the room on repayment of advance rental amount by D4 Abdul Muthaliff. So, both D4 Abdul Muthaliff and the appellant Nagoor Hanifa approached PW-4 Abdul Rahman, the landlord, asking him to intervene and settle the dispute. Over this also, a quarrel ensured between them. Then, he insisted D4 Abdul Muthaliff to give back his rental advance, to enable him to take his family and settle at the village of his father-in-law. Due to this, the appellant Nagoor Hanifa stopped going to work to the shop of D4 Abdul Muthaliff for three months. Nearly six or eight months prior to the occurrence, there was misunderstanding between the appellant Nagoor Hanifa and D4 Abdul Muthaliff, over the business dealings and the delay in payment of rent. PW-4 Abdul Majeeth and the appellant Nagoor Hanifa joined him as his employees 7. In 1985, D4 Abdul Muthaliff resigned his job and started his own business of printing and selling note books. Initially, D4 Abdul Muthaliff, PW-4 Abdul Majeeth and the appellant Nagoor Hanifa were together employed in F.A. Six years ago, D4 Abdul Muthaliff, sub-let one room to the appellant and another room to PW-4 Abdul Majeeth 6. PW-1 Abdul Rahman let out the entire premises of the first floor to D4 Abdul Muthaliff for a rent of Rs. In the first floor, there are four rooms and one hall. Ground and first floors were let out to tenants. The second floor was occupied by PW-1 along with his family members. Apart from the ground floor, the house consists of two more floors. 38, in Kutty Maistry Street, Sevenwells, Madras-79 belongs to PW-1 Abdul Rahman. Let us state the case of the prosecution as could be discerned from the evidence brought on record :- The house bearing Door No. (four counts) and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life under each count and ordered the substantive sentences to run concurrently 5.
#NAGOOR HANIFA DEATH TRIAL#
On termination of trial, the learned trial Judge found the appellant guilt of murder under Section 302, I.P.C. Hereinafter, we shall refer to Sabiya Begum, the wife as D1, Jiyabudeen and Aneeth Fathima, the children as D2 and D3 and Abdul Muthaliff, the husband as D4 4. 38, Kutty Maistry Street, Sevenwells, Madras-79, the appellant Nagoor Hanifa, committed the murders of one Sabiya Begum, her son Jiyabudeen aged about 2 years, her daughter Aneeth Fathima aged about 4 years and her husband Abdul Muthaliff, by spilling over the kerosene in their room and on their person and igniting with a match stick, and thereby he intentionally caused the death of the persons referred above 3. The gravamen of the charge is that on 18/19-5-1987 at about 2.00 a.m. The charge was framed against the appellant, in respect of each of the deceased under Section 302, I.P.C 2. 119 of 1987 before the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Madras. This is a case of quadruple murder, in which the appellant Nagoor Hanifa faced his trial in S.C.
0 kommentar(er)
