Mumbai court sentences man to life for killing son over his refusal to call 2nd wife mother

Mumbai, A court here sentenced a man to imprisonment for life for murdering his son over the latter’s refusal to address his second wife as mother.
Additional sessions judge S D Tawshikar on Monday held the accused, Salim Shaikh, guilty of the 2018 murder, citing that the prosecution has successfully proved that he was the only “author of the offence”.
As per a complaint lodged by the victim’s mother , the incident occurred in August 2018 when the accused had an argument with his son Imran after the latter refused to address his second wife as mother.
The quarrel took an ugly turn as Shaikh started assaulting his son, and sensing trouble, the complainant rushed to the police station to seek their intervention.
However, by the time the police arrived at their house in the Dongri area of south Mumbai, Shaikh had attacked his son with a scissor and grievously injured him.
The victim was declared dead at a hospital, the complaint stated.
Shaikh’s defence counsel claimed the victim was under the influence of drugs and had committed suicide by injuring himself with a sharp weapon.
The defence also cited that some injuries on the victim’s body were self-inflicted, as per the post-mortem report.
The court, however, disregarded the arguments and noted that the victim’s mother would not have rushed to the police station for help if he had attempted suicide.
It said the mother and others might have tried to stop him if he had attempted suicide.
The court also noted that the accused, instead of fleeing the scene, would have stayed with his injured son and admitted him to a hospital.
It said the other witness had also spoken about the quarrel between the father-son duo, and their oral testimony corroborated the medical evidence.
Terming it a rarest-of-rare case, the prosecution had sought a death sentence for the accused.
The court, however, held that though the prosecution was right in “saying that causing the murder of one’s own son in itself is a rarest of rare case”, this instance does not fit in the “rarest of rare” category carved out by the Supreme Court.
“Hence, considering overall circumstances, I find that it would be just and proper to award a sentence of imprisonment for life,” the judge said.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.