Nadi taxi driver guilty of murdering pregnant wife

A Nadi taxi driver has been found guilty of murdering his 28-year-old pregnant wife after the High Court in Lautoka concluded that he acted with the intention to kill.

Daniel Francis Prasad was found guilty of murdering his wife, Karishma Chaudhary, at their home in Kerebula, Nadi. He appeared before Justice Aruna Aluthge.

Prasad was remanded in custody pending sentencing after the court rejected his defences of lack of intent and provocation.

The accused was represented by Edwin Wainiqolo, while the State was represented by John Vaurasi.

In his judgment, Justice Aluthge said the prosecution presented evidence showing that Prasad admitted killing his wife with a cane knife during police interviews and a crime scene reconstruction.

Although Prasad denied making a voluntary confession, the court found his admissions credible beyond reasonable doubt.

The judge said the accused's statements, which contained both incriminating and exculpatory elements, had to be tested against the full body of evidence.

Physical evidence recovered from the scene, including the bloodied cane knife and the deceased's body, was consistent with Prasad's admissions.

Pathologist Dr Praneel Kumar confirmed that the fatal injuries were consistent with being inflicted by a cane knife and were caused with considerable force.

The wounds penetrated the occipital region of the brain and resulted in immediate death. Medical evidence also established that Karishma had died before reaching hospital.

Justice Aluthge said that Prasad had admitted handling the murder weapon, rejecting the defence argument that there was insufficient evidence linking him to the knife.

Prasad denied intending to kill his wife, claiming that he loved her and had no motive to take her life.

However, the court relied on objective evidence, including the weapon used, the force applied and his conduct following the killing, to determine his intention.

The court found that his actions after the incident, including fleeing with his children and failing to seek medical assistance for his wife, supported the prosecution's case that he intended the fatal outcome.

Statements made by Prasad to police and others were also considered by the court in determining his state of mind.

Provocation defence rejected

Justice Aluthge rejected the defence of provocation, which was based on allegations concerning the deceased's conduct, including claims of infidelity and cumulative provocation.

The judge examined the legal requirements for provocation under Fijian law, stressing that the defence requires a sudden loss of self-control supported by credible evidence.

The court found Prasad's account inconsistent and unsupported by independent evidence, with aspects of his narrative contradicting his own testimony.

Justice Aluthge said the allegations raised by the defence did not meet the legal threshold for provocation and could not justify the killing.

The court also noted that modern legal standards do not recognise sexual infidelity as a valid basis for a provocation defence, particularly where the response is grossly disproportionate.

Evidence established guilt

The judge said the prosecution had established all the elements of murder beyond reasonable doubt.

The court's finding was based not only on Prasad's admissions but also on eyewitness evidence, police testimony, physical evidence and medical findings.

Evidence from a neighbour and police officers consistently placed the accused at the scene and confirmed his conduct immediately following the killing.

The court also considered Prasad's shifting explanations and new narratives introduced during the trial, finding that they undermined his credibility.

Justice Aluthge stressed that the absence of forensic evidence such as fingerprints or DNA did not weaken the prosecution's case, given the strength of the other corroborating evidence.

The judge reiterated that the burden of proof remained with the prosecution and that merely lying in court was not, by itself, proof of guilt.

However, after assessing the evidence as a whole, the court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that Prasad killed his wife with the requisite intention.

His defence of provocation was rejected, and the killing was not reduced from murder to manslaughter. Prasad was therefore convicted of murder and remanded pending sentencing.

The court has scheduled September 14 for sentencing and further orders.

Justice Aluthge will take into consideration the period Prasad has already spent in custody when passing sentence.