Relief for convict who set fire to lover over sex refusal

The Bombay high court on Thursday commuted the life sentence awarded to a woman for killing her lover to 10-years of imprisonment. Twenty seven-year-old Mudas alias Mumtaz Sayyed was convicted by a sessions court in Navi Mumbai for murder after she set ablaze her lover Bablu because he refused to have sex with her as he was drunk and wanted to sleep.

Though the high court held that Mumtaz was responsible for Bablu’s death, it also said that the incident was a result of a sudden fight and hence the court set aside her conviction for murder, convicted her of culpable homicide not amounting to murder and reduced her sentence.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice V.K. Tahilramai and Justice Dr Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi passed this order while hearing appeal filed by Mumtaz her conviction for murder.

The prosecution’s case is that Bablu Sagir Ahmed Rain was in a relationship with the accused and on the night of June 29, 2006, he went to appellant’s house in Navi Mumbai. Both consumed liquor and had dinner. After that, while Bablu wanted to go to sleep, Mumtaz demanded that they have intercourse.

However, as Bablu was in an inebriated condition and drowzy, he tried to dissuade Mumtaz but started quarrelling with him and then poured kerosene on him and set him ablaze.

Shouting for help, Bablu rushed out of the house. Two of the neighbours saw him, extinguished the fire and rushed him to the nearby hospital. A police officer recorded Bablu’s statement in the hospital and arrested Mumtaz on the charge of attempt to murder. However Bablu, who had received 57 per cent burn injuries, died after 15 days and sections of murder was added to the case. Relying upon the dying declaration of deceased, the trial court in Thane district convicted Mumtaz for murder and sentenced her to life imprisonment in June 2008.

Dr Sachin Chitnis argued that Bablu was in his senses when the police recorded his declaration that incriminated Mumtaz. Mumtaz’s lawyer Rebecca Gonsalves argued that according to Mumtaz’s medical report, there were injuries on her body, which prove that the incident occurred in a fit of passion. Also, according to the dying declaration, the couple was drunk and the extent and nature of burn injuries found on victim was such that he died 15 days after the incident. So it made it clear that Mumtaz did not intend to kill Bablu.

“We find much substance in submissions advanced by the counsel for the appellant,” observed the bench while setting aside trial court judgment.