The Criminal Court has ruled that Mohamed Nizam is guilty of homicide in the case of the foreigner who went missing without a trace while working on a boat.
Litton, a Bangladeshi national, disappeared after departing Villingili on a boat in December 2022. The state filed charges against Nizam, Manaaru, GDh. Thinadhoo, who was traveling with him on that boat, alleging that he murdered him. This is the first time a murder charge has been brought in the Maldives in a case involving a missing person whose body has not been found.
The state alleges that Litton was thrown overboard for the purpose of taking the money he had in his possession.
While delivering the verdict in the hearing held at the Criminal Court today, the presiding judge, Mohamed Misbah, stated that police testified that at the time of his arrest, Nizam told the police that he had traveled with Litton and had thrown him overboard, though he claimed he did not do so with the intent to kill.
According to the judge, Nizam admitted in his investigative statement to throwing Litton into an area called "Galufalhu" and provided a detailed account of how it happened. The judge noted that the details revealed in the investigative statement and the evidence found by the police align, and testimony from witnesses showed that Litton could not be contacted after the time Nizam claimed the incident occurred.
Key points noted in the judgment:
- The chances of Litton surviving were slim due to the nature of the area where he was thrown.
- It was proven that Nizam held animosity toward Litton.
- Nizam admitted to throwing Litton overboard in his investigative statement.
- Other evidence aligns with the accounts in Nizam's investigative statement.
- The charge of causing death through a reckless act was proven.
The judge stated that although there are spots in the area where Litton was thrown where one could stand, the chances of Litton surviving were low because the area is a high-traffic zone for vessels, the incident occurred at night, there was no dry land nearby, and there was a possibility of injury during the fall.
Furthermore, the judge noted that several years have passed since the incident, and to date, there has been no sign that Litton is alive.
Although Nizam claimed that he gave the statement to the investigation under duress, the judge noted that Nizam’s side had spoken about this in two different ways. The judge also stated that since the statement was taken in the presence of a defense lawyer, and no such duress was reported to the lawyer at the time, and Nizam failed to produce any evidence of filing a complaint regarding duress with the relevant authorities, the claim was dismissed.
While police testimony stated that no duress was used during the taking of the investigative statement, the judge noted that the video footage of the investigation also showed no signs of distress from Nizam at the time the statement was taken. The judge added that even though Nizam claimed the statement was given under duress, his side did not deny the actual stories contained within that statement.
The judge stated that evidence proved Nizam was the only person traveling with Litton on the day he disappeared.
Furthermore, while witness testimony established that Litton had received more than MVR 90,000 before departing, Nizam’s own investigative statement also proved that he knew Litton had money.
The judge stated that since Nizam’s investigative statement mentioned that he did not receive money from Litton as previously agreed, it was proven that Nizam held animosity toward Litton when the two departed.
However, the judge stated that there was no evidence in the case to prove the crime of intentional murder to the standard of "beyond all doubt" required by Islamic Sharia. Therefore, the judge decided that Nizam was guilty under the Penal Code for causing the death of a human being through an act committed with reckless disregard for human life, to the standard required by law.
When given the opportunity to speak regarding the sentencing, the state requested an additional opportunity as they needed time to look into the situation of Litton’s family.
However, when questioned about the extent of the punishment, the state requested to raise the degree of the penalty and sentence him to 25 years in prison. Therefore, the determination of the sentence has been postponed to another day.
In addition to the murder charge, the state also charged Nizam with theft in this case, alleging that he stole Litton’s money. The judge ruled that this charge was also proven.
While Nizam was found guilty in this case, he had previously been sentenced to prison after being found guilty of a charge related to dealing in diamorphine.
