True Crime Stories

By Nischal Hegde

True Crime Stories: 19 Tales of Murder & Mayhem
Revised edition of True Murder Stories
It's a must read if you are a fan of Mystery true crime stories. Mystery murders of history are revealed in this book, some of which are gonna surprise you. From crime scene investigation to forensic evidence and trial of the case has been described. 100% real stories. These are all the real incidents that have been described in this book. I came across these shocking stories during my research as a forensic student !. It's because of the hard work of several people including the police, government agencies of various countries and the forensic experts that i'm able to publish these stories.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Lulu.com
• Release date: Mar 17, 2013
• ISBN: 9781300846116

Book preview

True Crime Stories

True Crime Stories

By Nischal Hegde

Copyright 2013  Lulu Author.

All rights reserved

ISBN:978-1-300-84611-6

Section 1

Imrana Rape Case

On 6 June 2005, Imrana, 28 years old at the time, and the mother of five children, was raped by her 69 year-old father in-law Ali Mohammad while she was asleep in her room, in Charthawal village in the Muzaffarnagar district Uttar Pradesh, India (located located 70 km from Delhi).

Weeping bitter, she immediately ran to her mother-in-law in the next room and moaned about the incident. Her mother-in-law being an orthodox wife dictated her to keep her mouth shut and promised her that it wouldn't happen again. Her husband, Noor Elahi was away from home working on a brick-kiln. Three days later, Imrana’s sister-in-law came to visit her and was quenched about the incident. Imrana's sister-in-law went back with the news to her husband and brothers-in-law. Pounding with anger Imrana's brothers rushed to Charthawal and beat up Ali Mohammad. It was then that others in the village came to know of the incident and a ‘panchayat’ was held.

The village elders and subsequently, several levels of Islamic legal opinion regarded Imrana’s marriage with her husband null, as the Sharia regards sexual relations with both the father and son as incestuous. Imrana was asked to divorce her husband, marry her father-in-law and treat het usband as son.

Imrana defied the panchayat’s ruling and continued living with her husband.

The leading Islamic seminary Darul Uloom Deoband also issued a fatwa or opinion, which quotes from Quran 4:22: wa la tankihoo ma nakaha aaba-o-kum, And marry not women whom your fathers married, and not distinguishing between rape and adultery, said that as a result of her father-in-law’s act, she should now be treated as the mother of her husband and she could no longer live with him even though Imrana had not married her father in law.

Due to such fatwa Imrana is in a way being prosecuted instead of her rapist father in law as she is being ordered to leave her husband and start a life with her rapist. The fatwa is a clarification of the ruling by the village leaders who disregarded the Islamic teachings for such cases for the sake of shunning Imrana who is thought to have brought shame to the community by having sexual intercourse with her father in law.

This sparked nation-wide controversy as critics argued the case was treated as adultery and not rape.

This fatwa was based on the Abu Hanifa school of Islamic Jurisprudence (Hanafi fiqh), which rules that on having sex with a man she marries, a woman has the status of mother to all his children. The other three schools, Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali, reject this position The All India Muslim Personal Law Board also endorsed the fatwa, but opinions were divided between the Hanafi and Shafi’i, the two sunni fiqh’s mostly represented in India.

Later, the Deoband seminary denied that it has issued such a fatwa. Nur Ilahi continued to stay with Imrana and said that they neither sought advice nor counsel from Deoband and have not raised the issue before clerics.

At one point, Uttar Pradesh chief minister Mulayam Singh Yadav also endorsed the view of the Darul Uloom that she can no longer live with her husband.

After Imrana’s case was highlighted by the national media, the National Commission for Women directed authorities in Muzaffarnagar to take action.

Pursuance to the order dated 29.6.2005, the Inquiry Committee consisting of:

1. Dr. Girija Vyas, Chairperson, NCW

2. Ms. Yasmeen Abrar, Member, NCW

3. Ms. Neeva Konwar, Member, NCW

4. Shri A.S. Qureshi, Retd. High Court Judge

5. Prof. M. Afzal Wani

6. Mrs. Tarannum Siddiqui, Women Study Centre, Jamia Milia University 

7. Shri Yogesh Mehta, Law Officer, NCW

Was constituted to inquire into the alleged rape of Imrana.

The body’s chairperson Girija Vyas asked the Uttar Pradesh government to punish the guilty and sought a report on the incident.

Imrana is confused about her fate. So are the ulema at Deoband. Days after they unleashed a storm of protests across the nation, the ulema at Dar ul-Uloom Deoband, perhaps in a desperate attempt to wriggle out of an unsavory controversy over the rape case, said they passed no fatwa whatsoever that mandated Imrana break away from her husband.

Dar ul-Uloom Deoband spokesman Adil Siddiqui clarified the role of the institution and claimed that the confusion began after Muzaffarnagar-based journalist Ashraf Usmani, asked for a written declaration of the diktat. It had no mention of Imrana and only spoke of a hypothetical situation, asking what would happen if a woman was raped by her father-in-law, but wished to remain with her husband.

The application was forwarded to the ‘nayab nazim’ (head) of the ‘fatwa wing’ of Dar ul-Uloom Deoband, Mufti Habib ur-Rehman, who subsequently issued the fatwa duly signed by him.

Dar ul-Uloom’s comment that Imrana was now ineligible to live with her husband Noor Mohammad has once again turned the focus on the fate of the rape victim.

Trapped among the irresponsible utterances of a Lucknow qazi, provisions of law and this latest involvement of Dar ul-Uloom, Deoband, the Imrana issue has now caught the attention of the ulema in many other cities, some of whom question the implementation of Shariah in part. The Shariah on Imrana can be justified only if the accused is punished under the law that provides for Sangsar — her father-in-law being stoned to death in public view, is one of the views.

Imam of Aishbagh Eidgah Maulana Khalid Rasheed Firangi Mahli said: There are no two views on Imrana going by the Shariah, but if the punishment for such crimes also follows on Shariat lines, then an effective check can be put on such incidents across the country.

Police registered a case under sections 376 (rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code against Mohammed Ali and arrested him. Police also filed a case against him on 30 June 2005 with a medical report and recorded Imrana's statement before a magistrate. The court had turned down Mohammed Ali's bail plea on 5 December 2005

In a video recorded by the Muslim Political Council of India, Imrana (veiled) says that once she screamed, Mohammed Ali had run away. On being asked again, she reiterates that the forceful attempt was not successful.

However, the court took a different view based on evidence presented in the trial. On October 2006, Mohammed Ali was condemned to a prison term of ten years for raping Imrana. At one point the defense lawyer sought a leniency based on age of the defendant, but this was denied. The judge also directed Mohammed Ali to pay compensation of Rs 8,000 to Imrana for raping her. On the separate charge of criminal intimidation, Mohammed ali was sentenced to three years in prison and fined in Rs 3,000.

The Delhi Gang Rape

The girl and her friend were returning from the Saket mall after watching a film 'Life of Pi' and had boarded the chartered bus at Munirka for Dwarka not knowing it was plying illegally. The minor among the accused had called for passengers telling them that it was going towards their destination.

The couple boarded the bus at around 9.30 pm. When the girl and her friend entered the