In a shocking incident at Sadguru Sharan Apartment in Bandra, Mumbai, a man identified as Mohammad Shariful Islam Shahzad, also known as Vijay Das, has been arrested by Mumbai Police for allegedly attacking actor Saif Ali Khan. The police claim that he executed the life-threatening attack. However, questions have begun to surface as to whether the individual arrested is truly the assailant. The attacker depicted in the CCTV footage seems distinct from the apprehended individual.
The primary source of these questions is the CCTV footage, exhibiting the attack on Saif. Confiscated by the police from Saif's apartment, the footage raises doubts as people say that Shariful Islam looks significantly different. Consequently, skepticism surrounds the police's actions. Yet, hidden within the police investigation lies the answer, confirming whether the man they captured is the actual attacker.
Media reports further assert noticeable discrepancies between the faces, eyes, lips, forehead, and brows of the criminal in the footage and the one taken into custody. The arrested man has a long forehead, whereas the criminal appears with a shorter one in the footage. Similarly, differences in complexion and hairstyle add to the intrigue.
Source: aajtak
The Big Question: Why Such Disparity Between Two Images?
Amidst this confusion, forensic analysis holds great importance. Mumbai Police asserts that fingerprints recovered from Saif's apartment match those of Shariful. The forensic team confirms the same, indicating they've detained the correct culprit. Moreover, the fingerprints were found on the pipe used to enter Saif's residence. But why do the two images differ so much?
Read More:
Forensic investigations are paramount in clarifying these discrepancies. In simpler terms, one theory behind differing appearances in images is the use of multiple filters by the police to enhance the brightness of the CCTV footage, which may have contributed to a difference in skin tone. Meanwhile, the apprehended criminal has a darker complexion, possibly due to the filter's impact.
Another possible reason involves photographic angles. When images are clicked from varying angles, certain features may appear different. In this case, the CCTV captures the criminal from a top perspective, whereas, the arrested suspect's picture is taken head-on.
Source: aajtak
Moreover, Shariful exhibits a difference in hairstyle, potentially adding to the public's doubts. The suspect allegedly altered his appearance by cutting his hair at a salon after the incident, explaining the difference.
Notably, Shariful's father, Ruhul Amin from Bangladesh, claims his son is not the criminal seen in the footage. He insists the actual perpetrator never had long hair, maintaining a military-style buzz cut. Amin intends to approach their foreign ministry and the Indian High Commission to secure his son's release, arguing that he is being framed.
Read More:
Evidence 1: Fingerprint analysis reveals matches between those found at the crime scene and Shariful's, validating his arrest by Mumbai Police.
Evidence 2: A broken knife piece, crucial to the attack, was recovered from a lake near Bandra following Shariful's input to the police.
Evidence 3: The location of Shariful's mobile number coincided with Saif Ali Khan's residence during the incident.
Evidence 4: Statements from the salon's proprietor, where Shariful allegedly had his hair cut post-incident, have been recorded.
Evidence 5: Individuals Shariful contacted post-incident report suspicious behavior, lending credence to police investigations.
Evidence 6: Shariful's cap, found at the crime scene, contains hair samples awaiting DNA verification, with the expectation that results will confirm his guilt.
Evidence 7: Shariful's identification parade remains pending, a legal formality expected to corroborate his arrest.
The conclusive nature of these evidences strengthens the case against Shariful, suggesting a righteous capture by Mumbai Police.
