Team Goemkarponn
MAPUSA: The Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC), Mapusa, has acquitted a Vasco resident accused of attempting to escape from police custody more than a decade ago, holding that the prosecution failed to establish any deliberate intention on the part of the accused to evade lawful detention.
The case stemmed from an incident at Anjuna Police Station on the night of November 6, 2014. The accused, Mazar Shaikh, also known by other names including Manzur and Manssor Shaikh, was in police custody and was being taken for a medical examination when an altercation allegedly took place.
According to the prosecution, Shaikh pushed a police constable, broke away from the escorting officers and struck his head against a glass door frame, allegedly as part of an effort to escape. Following the incident, police registered a case against him for resisting lawful custody and attempting to evade apprehension.
During the trial, however, the prosecution’s case was weakened by significant inconsistencies in witness testimonies. While the complainant claimed the episode occurred inside the interrogation room, other police personnel and an eyewitness stated that the accused had already been taken outside before returning towards the room where he sustained the injury.
The court found these conflicting versions difficult to reconcile and questioned the prosecution’s theory of an escape attempt. It observed that a person genuinely intending to flee would likely move towards the police station exit rather than deeper into the premises or back towards the interrogation area.
The judgment also highlighted discrepancies regarding which officers actually restrained the accused after the incident. These contradictions, the court noted, cast serious doubt on the reliability of the prosecution’s evidence.
Adding to the concerns, the court pointed out that a sketch of the alleged scene was prepared nearly three months after the incident, reducing its evidentiary value.
While acknowledging that the accused was in lawful custody at the relevant time, the court stressed that a conviction under Section 224 of the Indian Penal Code requires clear proof of intentional resistance or a conscious attempt to escape. It held that a brief scuffle, movement within the police station premises or pushing of a police officer, by itself, cannot automatically be interpreted as evidence of an intention to flee.
Applying the principle that criminal charges must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, the court concluded that the evidence on record was insufficient to sustain a conviction. Granting the accused the benefit of doubt, it acquitted Shaikh of all charges and brought to a close a case that had remained pending for over 11 years.
