Karnataka court gives death penalty to 4 for killing inter-caste couple in ’19 hate crime

A Karnataka court sentenced four family members to death for the 2019 murder of an inter-caste couple in Gajendragad, triggering widespread outrage.

By Coovercolly Indresh

Jan 31, 2025 08:10 am IST

A district court in Karnataka has sentenced four members of a family to death for murdering an inter-caste couple in Lakkalakatti village of Gajendragad taluk in 2019. The victims, Ramesh Madar, 29, and Gangamma Rathod, 23, were killed in broad daylight by members of Gangamma’s family. Madar belonged to a Scheduled Caste community while Rathod was from the Banjara community, classified as Other Backward Classes (OBC). The Gadag district court found Rathod’s brothers Ravikumar Rathod, 27, and Ramesh Rathod, 28, along with her uncles Shivappa Rathod, 25, and Parashurama Rathod, 39, guilty of the murders. Parashurama worked as a driver with the Kalyana Karnataka Road Transport Corporation.

The couple is survived by two children. Senior Gadag police officers confirmed that the four were given the death penalty. The attack occurred when the couple returned to their village for Diwali celebrations in 2019. “Gangamma’s brothers forcibly entered their home, dragged them outside and murdered them in full view of villagers,” said Gadag superintendent of police Baba Saheb Nemagouder. The incident was captured on video and circulated on social media, triggering widespread outrage.

According to Gajendragad police circle inspector Siddappa Bilagi, the couple had been in a relationship for over five years before marrying at a registrar’s office on April 2, 2017, despite opposition from Rathod’s family. Gadag district principal and sessions judge Basavaraj pronounced the death penalty for all four convicts on Wednesday. They were found guilty of premeditated murder and disrupting social harmony. Wednesday’s order, made public on Thursday, came as the Supreme Court separately reaffirmed that not every case of multiple murders qualifies as a “rarest of rare” instance warranting the death penalty, particularly when there is potential for reform. The top court bench commuted the death sentence of a man convicted of murdering his wife and four minor daughters, sentencing him instead to life imprisonment without remission. The court underscored that while the crime was brutal and deeply disturbing, the absence of criminal antecedents, favourable prison reports indicating a scope for rehabilitation and legal precedents weighed against imposing capital punishment.

Source: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/ktaka-court-gives-death-penalty-to-4-for-killing-inter-caste-couple-in-19-hate-crime-101738264204933.html

Maharashtra - Supreme Court Acquits Man Sentenced to Death for Rape and Murder Citing Flawed Evidence

January 30, 2025 | Pranav B Prem

The Supreme Court has set aside the judgment of the Bombay High Court, which upheld the conviction and death sentence awarded to Chandrabhan Sudam Sanap for the rape and murder of a 23-year-old woman in 2014. Citing major lapses in the prosecution's case, the Court acquitted the appellant of all charges.

A three-judge bench comprising Justices B.R. Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra, and K.V. Viswanathan observed that in cases relying solely on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The bench remarked, “There are gaping holes in the prosecution story leading to the irresistible conclusion that there is something more than what meets the eye in this case.”

Case Background

The case involved the rape and murder of a 23-year-old woman traveling from Andhra Pradesh to Mumbai for work in 2014. Her body was discovered in a partially burnt and decomposed state. The chemical analysis report concluded that the cause of death was head injury and smothering, accompanied by genital injuries likely caused by the forcible insertion of an object. The prosecution argued that the accused was last seen with the deceased and relied on circumstantial evidence to establish guilt. The Trial Court convicted the appellant and sentenced him to death, a decision upheld by the Bombay High Court. Aggrieved, the appellant approached the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court’s Observations

Failure of Circumstantial Evidence

The Supreme Court emphasized that the evidence presented by the prosecution failed to meet the high standard required in circumstantial evidence cases. Referring to Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (1984), the Court reiterated that: “The circumstances relied upon, when stitched together, do not lead to the sole hypothesis of the guilt of the accused. The chain is not so complete as to leave no reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused.”

Admissibility of CCTV Footage

The prosecution relied heavily on CCTV footage to argue that the appellant was last seen with the deceased. However, the Supreme Court found the footage inadmissible due to the lack of a Section 65-B(4) certificate under the Indian Evidence Act, as mandated in Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014). The bench observed: “When the prosecution was aware of the need for the 65-B(4) certificate and they themselves collected it for the CDRs, there was no reason as to why they did not collect the same for the CCTV footage. In view of the above, we are not able to place any reliance on the CCTV footage.”

Last Seen Theory

The prosecution’s reliance on the “last seen” theory was also found to be flawed. Witnesses PW-20 and PW-21, who allegedly saw the appellant with the deceased, only recorded their statements two and a half months after the incident. The Court observed that the unexplained delay significantly weakened their testimonies: “Analyzing the evidence, we must record that the witnesses fail to inspire the necessary confidence that a Court of Law looks for, to clinchingly establish the circumstances of last seen.”

Extrajudicial Confession

The prosecution also relied on an extrajudicial confession allegedly made by the appellant to PW-9. The Court rejected this as unreliable, stating: “Extra-judicial confession, by its very nature, has been held to be a weak piece of evidence... From the evidence mentioned above, we are not able to find that PW-9 enjoyed the confidence of the accused so as to safely infer that the accused would have made a clean breast of things to PW-9.”

Recovery of Trolley Bag

The recovery of the victim’s trolley bag, another key piece of evidence, was also dismissed. The witness who testified about the bag’s recovery could not clearly recall who had handed it over to her, further weakening the prosecution’s case.

Conclusion

After examining the evidence in detail, the Supreme Court concluded that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. The bench stated: “The prosecution has not established its case beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, we are constrained to come to the sole irresistible conclusion that the appellant is not guilty of the offences for which he has been charged.” The Court acquitted Chandrabhan Sudam Sanap of all charges, highlighting the “gaping holes” in the prosecution's story and emphasizing the necessity of adhering to strict standards of proof in cases involving circumstantial evidence.

Cause Title: CHANDRABHAN SUDAM SANAP v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Case No: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 879 OF 2019

Date: January-28-2025

Bench: Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, Justice K.V. Viswanathan

Source: https://www.24law.in/story/supreme-court-acquits-man-sentenced-to-death-for-rape-and-murder-citing-flawed-evidence

Maharashtra - Why the Supreme Court overturned a death sentence in 2013 rape-murder case - Chandrabhan Sanap

The case dates back to 2013 when a 23-year-old woman hailing from Machilipatnam, Andhra Pradesh was raped and murdered.

Written by: Azeefa Fathima

Edited by: Balakrishna Ganeshan

Published on: 29 Jan 2025

The Supreme Court on Tuesday, January 28, acquitted a man sentenced to death for the 2013 rape and murder of a 23-year-old woman hailing from Machilipatnam, Andhra Pradesh, stating that there are "gaping holes" in the prosecution's story. A bench of Justices BR Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra, and KV Viswanathan was hearing an appeal preferred by Chandrabhan Sanap, who was under a death sentence for the crime. The top court set aside the judgements of a trial court and the Bombay High Court that had convicted and given him capital punishment.

The court observed that the prosecution should prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, especially when relying on circumstantial evidence. “All these facts cumulatively constrain us to conclude that there are gaping holes in the prosecution story leading to the irresistible conclusion that there is something more than what meets the eye in this case.” “While the old adage, witness may lie but not the circumstances, may be correct, however, the circumstances adduced, as held by this Court, should be fully established,” the court observed.

The victim was residing at the Young Women’s Christian Association (YWCA) in Mumbai. She had traveled to Machilipatnam in December 2013 but never returned to Mumbai despite boarding her scheduled train. Days later, on January 16, 2014, her burnt and decomposed body was discovered. Her father identified the remains based on a ring she was wearing. A trial court, in 2015, convicted Chandrabhan on several charges, including murder, abduction, rape and robbery, and awarded him death sentence for murder. Later, in December 2018, the Bombay High Court upheld this punishment. The HC relied on 14 circumstantial evidence to sustain the conviction and the sentence:

Here's a breakdown of the 14 circumstantial evidences in a few words each:

1. Victim's travel: The woman traveled from Vijayawada to Mumbai.
2. Unreachable: Victim did not reach her destination. Calls remained unanswered.
3. Body was found: Burnt body was identified as the deceased.
4. Homicide & Rape: Post-mortem confirmed murder and sexual assault.
5. Evidence tampering: Body was burnt to destroy evidence.
6. Accused's actions: Accused consumed alcohol, and left with a friend's motorcycle.
7. The accused was at the railway station: CCTV showed the accused at the Lokmanya Tilak Terminus.
8. Last seen together: CCTV showed that the victim was with the accused.
9. Accused with belongings: Accused was seen with the victim's belongings.
10. Leaving with belongings: Witnesses saw the accused leaving with the victim's trolley bag.
11. Guilt-induced rituals: Accused had performed rituals to "wash off sin" and an entry in a register showing the payment for the puja.
12. Recovered Items: Victim's belongings were recovered from him.
13. Extrajudicial confession: Accused confessed to a friend that he raped and murdered her, poured petrol and set her body on fire.
14. Medical examination: Accused's mental and physical state assessed.

What did the SC say

The Supreme Court analysed circumstances 6 to 13, while making its decisions. Regarding the CCTV footage, the court ruled that it is inadmissible because of an absence of paperwork. The prosecution was supposed to furnish a Section 65-B(4) certificate (a document that verifies the authenticity and reliability of electronic records) under the Indian Evidence Act while collecting the electronic evidence. “Thus, when the prosecution was aware of the need for the 65-B (4) certificate and they themselves collected it for the CDRs there was no reason as to why they did not collect the same for the CCTV footage...In view of the above, there is no manner of doubt that certificate under Section 65-B(4) is a condition precedent to the admissibility of evidence by way of electronic record…,” the court said.

The court also added that it is not able to place any reliance on the CCTV footage that attributed that the appellant and the deceased were last seen together. The court also looked into the statements by eyewitnesses who saw Chandrabhan and the victim together. The court said that it found the witness statements unreliable because the statements were taken 2.5 months after the incident with no explanation for the delay. Further, the court also dismissed the statement of the astrologer to whom Chandrabhan went to conduct a puja to “wash off sins”. “We are really at a loss to understand as to what the prosecution seeks to establish. The priest has no systematic account of maintaining registers and on summoning of the Police, he seems to appear before the Police and produced the register out of the bag… In any case, the evidence given by PWs -15 16 and 17 do not constitute circumstantial evidence having any nexus with the commission of the crime in question. We totally discard this from the chain of circumstances,” the court said.

The court also dismissed the extrajudicial confession of Chandrabhan saying that it is generally held as a “weak piece of evidence”, and there was no corroboration in material particulars. Observing that there is a legal distinction between 'may be proved' and 'must be or should be proved', the court said that the circumstantial evidence in the case is not complete. “On the available evidence, we are of the opinion that it will be extremely unsafe to sustain a conviction against the appellant,” the court said and added, “The prosecution has not established its case beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, we are constrained to come to the sole irresistible conclusion that the appellant is not guilty of the offences for which he has been charged.”

Source: https://www.thenewsminute.com/news/why-the-supreme-court-overturned-a-death-sentence-in-2013-rape-murder-case

Calcutta High Court admits appeal of death sentence awardee in rape-murder of girl for hearing

28 Jan 2025

Admitting the appeal by Mostakin Sardar, the convict in the case, the division bench on Monday ordered that the POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act) court records on the rape and murder trial of the girl be produced before it.28 January 2025, 09:29 IST

Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has admitted an appeal challenging an order of a POCSO court that sentenced capital. A division bench presided by Justice Debangsu Basak directed the state to issue notice to the parties in the matter. Admitting the appeal by Mostakin Sardar, the convict in the case, the division bench on Monday ordered that the POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act) court records on the rape and murder trial of the girl be produced before it. The bench, also comprising Justice Md Shabbar Rashidi, directed that paper books be prepared within four weeks from receipt of the trial court records. A paper book contains copies or abstracts of pleadings exchanged between the parties in a matter.

Hearing in the appeal will be taken up by the court thereafter. The POCSO court at Baruipur in South 24 Parganas district had, on December 6 last year, sentenced 19-year-old Mostakin Sardar to death for raping and murdering the 10-year-old girl. The body of the girl was recovered from a pond in Joynagar's Kultali area on October 5. The girl, a class 4 student, went missing when she was returning home from a tuition class. The additional district and sessions judge Subrata Chattopadhyay convicted Sardar under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) sections 65 (rape), 66 (punishment for causing death or resulting in a persistent vegetative state of the victim), and 103 (murder), besides the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO).

The court gave the death penalty to the convict, describing the incident as the "rarest of rare" cases. The police filed the charge sheet on October 30 and the trial, which began on November 5, was completed in just 21 days.

Source: https://www.deccanherald.com/india/west-bengal/calcutta-high-court-admits-appeal-of-death-sentence-awardee-in-rape-murder-of-girl-for-hearing-3376175

Maharashtra - Bombay High Court concludes hearing 7/11 serial blasts death confirmation pleas

By Karuna Nidhi

Updated on: Jan 28, 2025 08:50 am IST

The Bombay High Court concluded hearings on death sentences for 7/11 blast convicts, with a verdict expected soon after queries on Friday.

MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Monday concluded the death sentence confirmation pleas and appeals of various accused convicted for their role in the 7/11 serial blasts in the city, which left 209 dead and over 700 injured. The special bench of justices Anil Kilor and Shyam Chandak, which started hearing the pleas and appeals in July 2024, has posted the matter on Friday for queries, following which it will deliver its verdict. 

On July 11, 2006, Mumbai was rocked by a series of seven powerful blasts on suburban locals on the western line, which ripped through the double-layered steel roofs and sides of each of the compartments. The Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) subsequently arrested 13 men for their purported role in the blasts and put them on trial under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA).

On September 30, 2015, a special MCOCA court convicted 12 of the 13 accused barring a schoolteacher, who was exonerated. Five of the accused were sentenced to death while seven others were sentenced to life imprisonment. In July 2024, the special bench of justices Kilor and Chandak was constituted following an application by Ehtesham Siddique, one of the death row convicts, who sought an early hearing of matters, through his lawyer, advocate Yug Chaudhry. On Monday, senior advocate Raja Thakare, who was appointed as special public prosecutor for the case in September 2023, finally concluded his arguments. He questioned the relevance of the evidence presented in court, claiming the defence had tried to mislead the court by providing “misinformation” obtained through the Right to Information (RTI) Act.

He also raised concerns over the psychological state of the accused, saying, “The accused eventually came to realise that once sections under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) are applied, they are booked forever. They have been left questioning their future and feel that their fate has already been decided.” Earlier, on January 13, former Delhi high court judge S Murlidhar, appearing on behalf of two of the accused, urged the court to acquit the convicts, saying, “These accused have been in jail for 18 years now. They have not stepped outside even for a day.” Murlidhar argued that confessional statements were extracted from his clients through torture and the investigation was marred by preconceived notions of guilt and communal bias typical in terror-related cases, which had cost the accused their prime years. While wrapping up the hearing on Monday, the special bench expressed gratitude towards the counsels for carrying the arguments gracefully. It reserved the matter for queries on Friday, with the judgment in the case anticipated soon after.

Source: https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/mumbai-news/hc-concludes-hearing-7-11-serial-blasts-death-confirmation-pleas-101738004768281.html

5 who raped, killed Chhattisgarh teen, murdered 2 family members sentenced to death

By HT Correspondent

Published on: Jan 22, 2025 07:19 pm IST

Additional sessions judge Mamta Bhojwani said the crime was “extremely perverted, heinous, brutal and cowardly”

RAIPUR: A special court in Chhattisgarh’s Korba has handed down a death penalty verdict for five men who raped and killed a 16-year-old tribal girl before murdering her two family members including a four-year-old girl. A sixth convict was sentenced to life imprisonment. Additional sessions judge Mamta Bhojwani, who delivered the verdict on January 15, held that this inhuman and cruel act of the accused was extremely perverted, heinous, brutal and cowardly. The judge, who presided over a fast track special court in Korba district, sentenced Santram Manjhwar (49), Abdul Jabbar (34), Anil Kumar Sarthi (24), Pardeshi Ram (39) and Anand Ram Panika (29) to death. The sixth convict, Umashanakar Yadav (26), was given life imprisonment, said special public prosecutor Sunil Kumar Mishra.

Mishra said he had sought the death penalty for all six accused but Yadav was sentenced to life imprisonment on medical grounds. They have been convicted under sections 302 (murder), 376 (2)G (gangarape) and other sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and provisions of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. “.. this inhuman and cruel act of the accused is extremely perverted, heinous, brutal and cowardly because they have killed three innocent and weak people to satisfy their lust. This has shocked the collective conscience of the entire society, “ the court said.

According to the prosecution, Manjhwar, who was already married, had been pressuring the teenager to be his “second wife” but the girl and her family firmly stood up to him. Manjhwar and his associates gang-raped the girl and bludgeoned her with stones before dumping her body in a forest near Gadhuproda village under Lemru police station area of Korba district. They also killed the girl’s father, aged around 60, and his four-year-old granddaughter who were with her. The victims belonged to the Pahadi Korwa tribal community, a Particularly Vulnerable Tribal Group (PVTG). “Punishment in proportion to the act committed by the accused is the demand of justice because justice is not done keeping in mind only the criminal but it is also necessary to pay equal attention to the victim who has been affected by that crime. Therefore, in the present case, this court is of the opinion that it is necessary to award the death sentence to the accused (except accused Umashankar), the judge said.

Source: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/5-who-raped-killed-chhattisgarh-teen-murdered-2-family-members-sentenced-to-death-101737553745672.html

Kerala - Sharon murder case: Why the court awarded 24-year-old Greeshma the death sentence

Judge AM Basheer said the Sharon murder case could not be classified as “rarest of rare” simply due to media attention, and provided reasoning for why this case qualified as such.

Written by: Azeefa Fathima

Edited by: Lakshmi Priya

Published on: 21 Jan 2025, 8:22

A Kerala court has sentenced a 24-year-old woman, Greeshma, to death, making her the youngest person to face a capital punishment sentence in the state. Greeshma is the prime accused in the 2022 murder of Sharon Raj, who was 23 at the time of his death, in what the court described as one of the “rarest of rare cases.” In its verdict, issued on Monday, January 20, the Neyyattinkara Additional Sessions Court referred to the murder as “extremely brutal, gruesome, diabolical, and revolting.” Greeshma and Sharon were in a relationship, but in 2022, Greeshma wanted to end it. Sharon, however, was allegedly unwilling to accept the breakup. Greeshma later confessed to the police that she had mixed poison into a kashayam (an ayurvedic concoction) which she gave Sharon to drink. He died on October 25 from cardiac arrest, caused by organ failure. The “rarest of rare cases” doctrine was established by the Supreme Court in 1980, in the case of ‘Bachan Singh v State of Punjab’. The top court ruled that the death penalty should only be applied in the most exceptional cases, where the crimes are heinous enough to shake the collective conscience of society, and where no other punishment would suffice. Factors such as the brutality of the crime, premeditation, the manner of execution, the convict’s potential for rehabilitation, and the impact of the crime on society are considered. Judge AM Basheer, who presided over the case, stated at the outset that the case could not be classified as one of the “rarest of rare” cases simply due to media attention. However, he went on to provide reasoning for why this case qualified as such.

Greeshma

How the Sharon murder case qualifies as ‘rarest of rare’

The court weighed the aggravating circumstances (crime test) against the mitigating circumstances (criminal test) to determine whether this murder could be considered “rarest of rare.” Aggravating factors make an offence more severe — these include whether the crime was planned or premeditated, if the victim was vulnerable, and the severity of the crime. Mitigating factors, on the other hand, reduce the severity of the offence, providing context that may warrant compassion, such as whether the crime was committed under pressure, whether it was the first offence, and the convict’s socioeconomic background or lack of criminal record.

Regarding the aggravating factors in Sharon’s murder, the court ruled that the crime was “extremely brutal.” “Only with the mind of extreme brutality one can repeat the same crime against her boyfriend or 'husband' while in love. She being a repeated offender, not entitled to mercy,” the court said. “I conclude, the murder committed by the accused is extremely brutal and diabolical one. The medical evidence speaks volumes about the brutality of the crime,” it added. The judge also said that Greeshma “actively sought to prolong the victim's suffering designed to cause extreme pain before death using gruesome methods.” He ruled that this indicated a ‘cruel motive.’ Judge Basheer observed that the crime was of a “socially abhorrent nature,” as it was “repulsive and provoked intense anger” in the community. “The offence was committed outrageously, depriving Sharon from having even a gulp of water for 11 days,” the court remarked. Further calling it a “murder without provocation,” the judge said that the crime was committed in such a brutal manner that it shocked not only the judicial conscience but also the collective conscience of the society. “The offence was committed with an intention to create fear, psychosis in the public at large and it created panic among lovers and friends. It gave a message that a lover cannot be believed,” the judge continued. He also stated that Greeshma committed a breach of trust in the relationship.

Considering the mitigating circumstances, the court said it found no evidence of extreme mental or emotional disturbance, and ruled that Greeshma was not entitled to leniency based on age, as both she and Sharon were of the same age. Furthermore, the court decided that Greeshma’s potential for reform and rehabilitation was low. “She planned murder by corrosive poison so that it can not be easily detected, for which she conducted research at length on paraquat. Therefore, I find substance in the submission by the learned Public Prosecutor that the convict had ‘devilish thought’ in her mind because only cunning and cruel criminals can repeat the offence. Such a person can not be reformed,” the judge concluded. The court further stated that it would be failing in its duty if it did not impose the maximum punishment, asserting that the death sentence alone would be proper and legally justified. “Taking into consideration all the facts and materials, it is crystal clear that the entire act of convict amounts to a barbaric and inhuman behaviour of the highest order.” “When the aggravating circumstances (crime test) outweigh the mitigating ones (criminal test), the court will typically impose a sentence on the higher end of the spectrum. The balance of justice tilts in favour of the proved aggravating circumstances. There were two attempts, one failed and the other accomplished, both held within a span of two months. For the aforementioned reasons I have no hesitation to hold that this is a rarest of rare case,” the court concluded, sentencing Greeshma to death.

Sharon was a final-year BSc Radiology student, while Greeshma was pursuing a postgraduate degree in literature when the murder occurred. On October 14, 2022, Sharon visited Greeshma’s house, where she offered him a concoction, claiming it would relieve pain. Sharon’s friend, who accompanied him, said that he began to feel unwell after leaving Greeshma’s house. He was later taken to the Parassala Government Hospital and referred to the Thiruvananthapuram Medical College Hospital. However, he was sent home after his blood tests came back normal. On October 15, 2022, Sharon’s health deteriorated further, and he was taken to several hospitals before being readmitted to the Thiruvananthapuram Medical College Hospital. He was eventually admitted to the ICU and died on October 25 due to cardiac arrest, which was caused by organ failure. After his death, Sharon’s family alleged that this was a planned murder, and on October 30, the investigation was handed over to the Crime Branch special investigation team. Greeshma was arrested for murder, while her mother Sindhu and her uncle Nirmal Kumar were arrested for abetting the crime and destroying evidence. Sindhu was acquitted, while Nirmal was sentenced to three years in prison.

Source: https://www.thenewsminute.com/kerala/sharon-murder-case-why-the-court-awarded-24-year-old-greeshma-the-death-sentence

West Bengal - Death sentence to 45-year-old man within 54 days of rape, murder of minor girl

The verdict came a day before the Sealdah court was scheduled to announce its judgment on the rape and the murder of a junior doctor at R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9

Snehamoy Chakraborty 

Published 18.01.25, 10:43 AM

Police take Ashok Singh out of the court on Friday.Picture by Amit Kumar Karmakar

A court in Hooghly district on Friday awarded the death penalty to a 45-year-old man for raping and murdering a minor girl in November 2024. Chandraprova Chakraborty, the additional district and session judge of the Pocso court at Chinsurah, pronounced the sentence within 54 days of the crime. Ashok Singh had raped and murdered the five-year-old after luring her with a packet of potato chips on November 24. The verdict came a day before the Sealdah court was scheduled to announce its judgment on the rape and the murder of a junior doctor at R.G. Kar Medical College and Hospital on August 9.

Chief minister Mamata Banerjee and her nephew Abhishek hailed Hooghly rural district police and its chief Kamanasish Sen for the speedy investigation and for ensuring the capital punishment for the accused within a very short time. "I thank Hooghly Rural District Police for their swift action and thorough probe that ensured speedy trial and conviction in 54 days. My heart goes to the family, and I share their pain and longing," Mamata wrote on her X handle on Friday evening. "A rapist has no place in our world. All of us together will make it a safer place for our children through stringent law, social reforms, effective and unforgiving administration. No such crime will go unpunished," she added.

The Hooghly verdict is being billed as the fastest conviction of a rapist as the police ensured the completion of the investigation within 13 days and the capital punishment of the accused within 54 days by producing the necessary evidence in the court. Earlier, in the case of the rape and murder of a Class IV student at Kultali of South 24-Parganas, a court at Baruipur had awarded the death penalty to the accused within 62 days of the crime. Abhishek Banerjee, the national general secretary of the Trinamool Congres, hailed Bengal's "zero-tolerance approach to crimes against women". "This serves as a powerful reminder that while others may offer mere lip service to NARI SURAKSHA, Bengal stands firm with a ZERO TOLERANCE APPROACH to crimes against women," the Diamond Harbour MP wrote on X on Friday.

The leader of the Opposition, Suvendu Adhikari, welcomed the judgment but said the capital punishment awarded by lower courts was commuted by higher courts because of the apathy of public prosecutors. He gave the example of how those accused in the Kamduni rape and murder incident were relieved of the gallows because of the alleged state's failure. "Madam CM, why are you so eager to promote the Death Sentence so early. Let's wait for at least 10 years to see if the convict is actually hanged or acquitted just like the convicts of Kamduni Case," Adhikari wrote on his X handle. A senior police officer said the punishment was ensured within a very short period as the Hooghly rural police had not delayed the investigation and had taken all possible steps to file the chargesheet as soon as possible.

"Good teamwork brought great relief to us. We ensured capital punishment for the rape and murder accused in a very short period.... I thank both the judiciary and our public prosecutors who helped us deliver justice for the parents of the minor girl," said Hooghly rural police SP Kamansish Sen, who personally monitored the case from Day One. The mother of the girl said she was happy with the judgment that came on the birthday of her five-year-old daughter. "We kept our faith in the police who finally ensured punishment for the culprit who brutalised my daughter. My daughter loved to have cake that I could not offer her this year," said the mother. 

Source: https://www.telegraphindia.com/west-bengal/death-sentence-to-45-year-old-man-within-54-days-of-rape-murder-of-minor-girl/cid/2078187

West Bengal - Court hands death sentence to rapist on girl’s sixth birthday

Falguni Banerjee and Dwaipayan Ghosh 

Jan 18, 2025

KOLKATA/CHINSURAH: A Hooghly POCSO court on Friday sentenced to death a 42-year-old daily wage labour for raping and murdering a five-year-old 54 days ago, on Nov 24 last year, in Gurap. Had the child been alive, she would have celebrated her sixth birthday on Friday. This is the third instance since Nov last year that Pocso trial courts in Bengal (first in Kultali, then in Farakka) have sentenced rapist-murderers of minor girls to death. The prosecution proved their charges that the victim was lured with a five-rupee packet of chips by her neighbour, Ashok Singh, who raped and murdered her. On Wednesday, Judge Chandraprabha Chakraborty had convicted the accused. Chinsurah public prosecutor, Shankar Gangopadhyay, said that on Nov 24 the child was playing in front of her house around 6 pm. Her father had gone to the local market to buy meat. When he returned home and couldn't find his daughter, the family began searching a couple of hours later. She was found in a bloodied state in the house of their neighbour Ashok. She was dead. The victim girl trusted Ashok blindly and fondly called him jethu (elder uncle).

CM Mamata Banerjee in a statement on X, said, "Today, the Court has pronounced death sentence for the convict who had raped and murdered the small girl of Gurap, and I thank the Judiciary for that. I thank Hooghly Rural District Police for their swift action and thorough probe that ensured speedy trial and conviction in 54 days. My heart goes to the family, and I share their pain and longing. A rapist has no place in our world. All of us together will make it a safer place for our children through stringent law, social reforms, effective and unforgiving administration. No such crime will go unpunished." A Special Investigation Team (SIT) led by Hooghly (rural) police superintendent Kamanasish Sen, set a precedent by filing a charge sheet in 13 days after the incident. The forensic report conclusively linked the murderer with the victim. Least Ashok took an alibi of being "mentally unsound", the police report also included a mental alertness report. Ashok was charged with BNS sections 65 (2), 66, and 103 (1), and section 6 of the POCSO Act. While police pressed the charges in court, another police officer was attached as the grievance officer to the hapless parents. The trial commenced on Dec 11 and ended on Jan 3.

(The victim's identity has not been revealed to protect her privacy as per Supreme court directives on cases related to sexual assault)

Source: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/kolkata/court-hands-death-sentence-to-rapist-on-girls-sixth-birthday/articleshow/117337829.cms

Uttar Pradesh - Lucknow couple awarded death sentence for killing six members of family

By Pawan Dixit, Lucknow

Updated on: Jan 18, 2025 06:20 am IST

Court also imposes ₹5 lakh fine each on the duo for the murders committed at a Banthra village on April 30, 2020 over a property dispute.

A Lucknow court on Friday awarded the death sentence to a couple for killing six members of their family, including the husband’s parents, his elder brother, the brother’s wife and two minor children over a property dispute nearly five years ago in 2020. The court of additional district and sessions judge Rohit Singh also imposed a fine of ₹5 lakh each on the duo — Ajay Singh and his wife Rupa Singh. The couple’s minor son is also an accused in the case and his trial before the Juvenile Justice Board is yet to start.

The incident took place on April 30, 2020 at Gudauli village under the Banthara police station of Lucknow. The court awarded the death sentence to the couple under Indian Penal Code Sections 302 (murder) and 34 (multiple people committing a crime in furtherance of a common intention and each person is liable for the crime). Ajay Singh, along with his wife Rupa Singh and minor son had killed Ajay’s elder brother Arun Singh, his wife Ram Sakhi, their minor children (son and daughter) and Ajay’s parents Ram Dulari and Amar Singh at his home in Gudauli, according to the prosecution. “The court has awarded the death sentence to Ajay Singh and his wife Rupa Singh for killing six members of their family for property. The court considered the case as rarest of the rare. Their minor son is also an accused in the case. He is in juvenile jail but the trial is yet to start,” said Manoj Tripathi, district government counsel.

According to the police, Ajay Singh had heated arguments with his elder brother Arun Singh over property and their father Amar Singh favoured Arun (the elder son). During this heated exchange, Ajay attacked the family members with a sickle killing his father, mother, elder brother and his wife and their two children – a son and a daughter. “During trial of the case, the court came to the conclusion that murders were carried out by Ajay Singh, his wife and son in a planned manner,” said Tripathi. Additional district government counsel MK Singh and government advocate Kamlesh Kumar Singh appeared before the court on behalf of the state government.

Source: https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/lucknow-news/lucknow-couple-awarded-death-sentence-for-killing-six-members-of-family-101737138659160.html

Haryana - Man given death penalty for killing disabled younger brother

By HT Correspondent, Rohtak

Updated on: Jan 17, 2025 05:02 am IST

“Ashok Kumar was disgruntled after my mother had transferred the plot to Deepak. My elder brother Ashok decapitated Deepak and roamed with the latter’s severed head for one day and later threw it in a canal.”

A local court in Haryana’s Fatehabad on Thursday sentenced a man to death for brutally killing his brother with disability over property dispute in 2020. District and sessions judge Deepak Aggarwal convicted Ashok Kumar under sections 302 (murder), 457, 506 (criminal intimidation) and 201 of the Indian penal code. He awarded death penalty to the accused besides imposing a fine of ₹35,000 on him. Aggarwal termed this incident as ‘rare of the rarest’. According to police, the case dates back to June 18, 2020 when the victim’s sister Sushma had lodged a police complaint against her elder brother Ashok Kumar for allegedly killing their younger brother Deepak, who was disabled. She told the police that Deepak was living with their mother in Fatehabad’s Tohana.

“Ashok Kumar was disgruntled after my mother had transferred the plot to Deepak. My elder brother Ashok decapitated Deepak and roamed with the latter’s severed head for one day and later threw it in a canal. We got information from Deepak’s friend that Ashok had killed him. We spotted Deepak’s body in a pool of blood and informed the police,” she added. According to police, the accused Ashok Kumar had fled with ₹60,000 in cash, two mobile phones and a gold bracelet of Deepak. Later, he informed all the relatives that he had killed his brother, and he had even recorded the audio calls.

Source: https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/chandigarh-news/man-given-death-penalty-for-killing-disabled-younger-brother-101737048837145.html

Orissa - Rayagada Triple Murder: Orissa HC Commutes Death Sentence Of Nine Convicts To Life Imprisonment

By ETV Bharat English Team

Published : January 15, 2025 at 6:20 PM IST

While commuting the death sentences, the High Court also directed Odisha government to provide financial compensation of Rs 30 lakh to the survivors.

File Photo of Orissa High Court (ETV Bharat)

Cuttack: The Orissa High Court here on Wednesday commuted the death sentences of nine persons convicted of murdering three of a family in Rayagada, to life imprisonment, citing need for judicial restraint and a balanced approach. All nine prisoners—identified as Dengun Sabar, Dasunta Sabar, Dalasa Sabar, Aajanta Sabar, Padhantu Sabar, Iru Sabar, Lakiya Sabar, Bubuna Sabar, and Malku Sabar—hail from Kitum village under Puttasing police station in Rayagada district. The convicts were originally sentenced to death by the Rayagada Sessions Court in March 2021, on charges of murdering three of a family including a minor, on suspicion of practicing witchcraft. However, the High Court took into account the socio-economic circumstances of the convicts and their 'satisfactory' conduct during these eight years in jail, when deciding to spare them the death penalty.

2016 RAYAGADA TRIPLE MURDER

Reportedly, on September 9, 2016, 45-year-old Asina Sabar, his wife Amabaya, and their elder daughter Ashamani (15), were brutally attacked and buried alive in the village graveyard. The accused forced a syringe filled with medicine into Ashamani's mouth, cheek and eyes before burying all three victims in the graveyard. They later exhumed and cremated the bodies to destroy evidence, reports said. According to case records, the family’s younger daughter, Melita (now 22-year-old), and two younger brothers had escaped the attack. Melita was an informant in the case and was the sole witness to this horrific crime.

WHAT HIGH COURT SAID

Taking up the death reference, a Division Bench of HC comprising Justices SK Sahoo and RK Pattnaik concluded that capital punishment would be disproportionate and unwarranted given the facts and mitigating factors. The Bench emphasised that life imprisonment was a more suitable sentence under the circumstances. "We commute the death sentence to life imprisonment,” the High Court declared in its ruling, noting that the punishment would cover each of the three murders committed by the appellants. The sentences, the Court clarified, would run concurrently and extend to the remainder of their natural lives, without any possibility of further remission or commutation. While commuting the death sentences, the High Court also directed the Odisha government to provide financial compensation within four weeks to the survivors under the Odisha Victim Compensation (Amendment) Scheme, 2018. A total of Rs 30 lakh (Rs 10 lakh for each deceased) must be disbursed among Melita and her two brothers, in equal shares, the court said. 

Source: https://www.etvbharat.com/en/!state/2016-rayagada-triple-murder-orissa-high-court-commutes-death-sentence-of-nine-convicts-to-life-imprisonment-enn25011504430

West Bengal - Man Sentenced To Death For Rape And Murder Of Minor Girl In Bengal

Jun 11, 2025 16:52 pm IST

Noting that the victim was of the same age as the accused's daughter, the judge observed that the crime falls under the rarest of rare category.

Jalpaiguri: A special POCSO court here awarded death sentence to a man for the rape and murder of a minor girl in West Bengal's Jalpaiguri district. Noting that the victim was of the same age as the accused's daughter, the judge observed that the crime falls under the rarest of rare category. The court sentenced convict Haripada Roy to death for the rape and murder of the girl.

Jalpaiguri special POCSO (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) court judge Rintu Sur also directed the district legal services authority to pay Rs 5 lakh compensation to the victim's family. He was also sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs 5,000 for destroying evidence. The 11-year-old girl was abducted from in front of her house by the accused before raping and murdering her on September 29, 2023, prosecution lawyer Debasish Dutta said. The lawyer said that since the panchayat board was being formed on that day, most of the villagers went there, including the victim's father and uncle.

After they returned, the girl's mother told them that she had been missing since 2 pm, and when she was not found after an extensive search, the uncle lodged a missing complaint at Dhupguri police station in Jalpaiguri district. The body of the girl was found in a sack near a local river a few days later. A post mortem examination of the body revealed that she had been raped and strangulated to death, Dutta added. The accused, a neighbour, was arrested following statements by locals that the girl was seen entering his house, followed by the recovery of evidence, the prosecution lawyer said.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Source: https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/man-sentenced-to-death-for-rape-and-murder-of-minor-girl-in-west-bengals-jalpaiguri-8642010

Jharkhand - Man sentenced to death for rape and murder of minor

Lohardaga, Jan. 11, 2025

In a major action taken by the District Civil Court on Friday in the district, the court of Judge First cum Special Judge POCSO Act Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari has sentenced a young man to death along with life imprisonment and fine in the case of murder after raping a girl. Has also been imposed. The matter is on 24 December 2022. 

Where in Areya village of Bagdu police station area of the district, a 5-year-old minor girl was raped and murdered by the accused Indra Oraon of the same village, against whom the girl's mother Soni Oraon, aged about 30 years, husband Anil Oraon, village Areya. By giving a written application to Police Station Bagdu, District Lohardaga, an FIR was lodged in Bagdu Police Station regarding rape of a minor girl. A case was registered regarding this matter under Bagdu police station case number 33/2022, dated 24.12.2022, section 302/376 (2) (F) IPC and 06 POCSO Act. 

Thereafter, after completing the investigation, Bagdu police station charge sheet number- 07/2023, dated 22.02.2023 was submitted against the accused under Section 302/376 (2) (F) IPC and 06 POCSO Act. After which Section 302 IPC and POCSO 06 /42 The accused was hanged after being found guilty under the POCSO Act.

Source:  https://www.msn.com/en-in/crime/general/man-sentenced-to-death-for-rape-and-murder-of-minor/ar-BB1rgUsi

Summary AI

📍 Case Overview

• Place: Areya village, Bagdu Police Station area, Lohardaga district, Jharkhand

• Date of Incident: 24 December 2022

• Court: District Civil Court, Lohardaga

• Presiding Judge: Akhilesh Kumar Tiwari, Judge First-cum-Special Judge (POCSO Act)

• Judgment Date: 11 January (Friday)

---

👤 Parties Involved

• Accused: Indra Oraon, resident of Areya village

• Victim: 5-year-old minor girl

• Complainant: Victim’s mother Soni Oraon (about 30 years old), wife of Anil Oraon

---

📝 FIR & Investigation

• FIR was lodged by the victim’s mother at Bagdu Police Station

• Police Case No.: 33/2022

• Date: 24.12.2022

Sections Invoked

• IPC:

  • Section 302 – Murder

  • Section 376(2)(f) – Rape of a minor

• POCSO Act:

  • Section 6 (Aggravated penetrative sexual assault)

  • Read with Section 42

• After investigation, Charge Sheet No. 07/2023, dated 22.02.2023, was submitted against the accused.

---

⚖️ Trial & Conviction

• The court found the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt under:

  • Section 302 IPC

  • Section 376(2)(f) IPC

  • Section 6/42 of the POCSO Act

• Evidence considered included:

  • Medical and forensic evidence

  • Witness testimonies

  • Circumstantial evidence establishing the accused’s involvement

---

🔨 Sentence Awarded

The court imposed multiple punishments, considering the gravity of the crime:

1. Death penalty for the offence under Section 302 IPC

2. Life imprisonment under POCSO Act (Section 6/42)

3. Fine imposed (amount as directed by the court)

4. Default sentence prescribed in case of non-payment of fine

(As per law, the death sentence will be subject to confirmation by the Jharkhand High Court.)

---

⚖️ Court’s Observations

• The judge described the crime as extremely heinous, brutal, and shocking to the collective conscience of society

• The victim was a helpless 5-year-old child

• The court held that the offence fell within the “rarest of rare” category, warranting the maximum punishment

• Emphasized that crimes against children demand strict deterrence

Uttarakhand - Sentenced to death as minor, man set free after 23 years

By Abraham Thomas

Updated on: Jan 09, 2025 04:00 am IST

The bench said that constitutional courts have a task to unearth the truth and give full effect to social welfare legislations such as the Juvenile Justice Act.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday set free a minor offender, more than 23 years after he was sentenced to death by an Uttarakhand court in a murder case, concluding how “grave injustice” was meted out to him by the trial court, high court and the top court that upheld his punishment overlooking the clear evidence establishing him to be a minor of just 14 years at the time of offence. Setting right its own mistake, a bench headed by justice MM Sundresh said, “This is a case where the appellant has been suffering due to the error committed by the courts. We have been informed that his conduct in the prison is normal, with no adverse report. He lost an opportunity to reintegrate into the society. The time which he has lost, for no fault of his, can never be restored.”

Justice MM Sundresh

Directing his release from jail even as the court upheld his conviction in the brutal and chilling murders of three persons in 1994, the bench said that constitutional courts have a task to unearth the truth and give full effect to social welfare legislations such as the Juvenile Justice (JJ) Act, which provides for the plea of minority to be determined by courts. The bench, also comprising justice Aravind Kumar said, “In a country like ours, where society is fragmented due to various reasons including, but not limited to illiteracy and poverty, the role which is assigned to the court assumes great significance. Sufficient opportunities must be given to the child in conflict with law to get the benefit of the 2015 JJ Act.”

Justice Aravind Kumar

The court was dealing with the convict’s plea who had approached the court against an August 2019 judgment by the Uttarakhand high court refusing to interfere with the order passed by President of India in exercise of its pardoning powers under Article 72 by which the death sentence was commuted to life with a rider that he would not be freed from jail till he attained 60 years in 2040. His appeal in the top court was argued by senior advocate S Muralidhar who pointed out that at every stage, injustice was meted to the convict who kept telling the trial court, high court and Supreme Court that he was a minor at the time of committing the offence. The trial court convicted him in 2001 and dismissed his juvenility claim based on a bank cheque book and the account he held in the bank according to which his age was 20 years at the time of offence. This fact weighed with the HC and the Supreme Court when his appeals were dismissed in 2002.

Senior Advocate S Muralidhar

He later preferred a review petition before the top court where he produced his school leaving certificate but the same was also dismissed in March 2003. He then approached the Governor of Uttarakhand who refused to alter his sentence. He again approached the top court by filing a writ petition claiming that he was a minor. This petition also got dismissed in February 2005 but the court allowed him to file a curative petition. A year later, his curative petition was heard by the top court and dismissed in February 2006. Interestingly, during the curative petition proceedings, the Uttarakhand government filed an affidavit accepting the convict’s age to be 14 years. It produced school records to show his date of birth to be January 4, 1980. Despite this admission, the curative plea was dismissed. The only remedy that remained for him was to knock the President’s doors which he did and got his death sentence commuted but failed to obtain release.

Justice Sundresh, writing the judgment for the bench, said, “The approach of the courts in the earlier round of litigation cannot be sustained in the eye of law... The court is expected to travel an extra mile to satisfy its conscience as to whether the case on hand would attract the provisions of the 2015 Act and, for the aforesaid purpose, the process enumerated thereunder will have to be necessarily followed.” While setting aside the HC order refusing to interfere with the Presidential order, the bench clarified that its decision should not be construed as having interfered with the executive power of President. Rather, it said, “The issue that we are concerned with is the failure of the court in not applying the mandatory provisions of the 2015 Act with specific reference to the plea of juvenility. Therefore, it is not a review of the Presidential order, but a case of giving the benefit of the provisions of the 2015 Act to a deserving person.”

Realising that almost 25 years had gone by since the incident took place, the court directed the Uttarakhand State Legal Services Authority to play a “proactive role” in identifying welfare schemes to facilitate the rehabilitation and “smooth reintegration” of the appellant into the society upon his release. The court said, “A child is a product of the present, in need of being moulded, to thrive in the future. Deviant behaviour of a child in conflict with law should be a concern of the society as a whole. One must not lose sight of the fact that the child is not responsible for an act of crime, but is rather victimized by it. Such a child is nothing but an inheritor of crime, a legacy which it does not wish to imbibe.”

The state government had argued that entertaining the petition would set a negative precedent as constitutional courts should not be seen as sitting in review over Presidential decision. The court said, “It must be kept in mind that the entire judicial system is meant for the discovery of the truth, it being the soul of a decision.... When procedural law stands in the way of the truth, the court must find a way to circumvent it.” There would be no bar on the constitutional courts to consciously take a deeper look as doing so, is an act in fulfilment of a mandated duty upon courts to “give effect to the laudable objective of a social welfare legislation”.

The convict was a gardener in the house of a retired Army Colonel in Dehradun and had committed the murders by slashing the necks of the retired Colonel, his sister aged 65, a 27-year-old son. He also attacked the Colonel’s wife but she survived the attack. The state represented by advocate Vanshaja Shukla had pointed out to the brutality of the crime and the fact that he went absconding for almost five years till he was arrested with great difficulty in November 1999 from West Bengal, to justify his punishment.

Source: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/sentenced-to-death-as-minor-man-set-free-after-23-years-101736364102808.html

Karnataka man gets death sentence for drowning three children in well, attempting wife’s murder: Report

By HT News Desk

Updated on: Jan 02, 2025 02:09 pm IST

Additionally, the court imposed a fine of ₹10,000 and instructed the District Legal Services Authority to provide financial assistance to his wife. A 43-year-old man from Karnataka has been sentenced to death for the heinous crime of killing his three children and attempting to murder his wife. 

The incident took place in 2022 and shocked the residents of Thalipady village near Mangaluru, Indian Express reported. The third Additional District and Sessions Court in Mangaluru, presided over by Judge Sandhya S, handed the death penalty to Hitesh Shettigar, also known as Hithesh Kumar, on Tuesday, the report added. Shettigar was found guilty of pushing his three children—Rashmitha (4), Uday Kumar (11), and Dakshith alias Daksh (4)—into an open well on June 23, 2022. He also tried to push his wife, Lakshmi, into the same well, but she survived. Investigations revealed that Shettigar had stopped working after the COVID-19 pandemic, leaving his family in financial distress, the report added. Lakshmi, who worked as a beedi roller and at a local hotel, became the sole breadwinner. Despite her efforts, Shettigar allegedly refused to contribute financially or seek steady employment.

Mangaluru's third Additional District and Sessions Court Judge Sandhya S awarded the death sentence to Hitesh Shettigar, also known as Hithesh Kumar, who was arrested in 2022 for killing his children

What happened on June 23, 2022?

The day of the incident unfolded when Lakshmi returned home from work to find her children missing. Shettigar feigned concern and joined her in the search, while the children had already drowned in the well. According to reports, the children clung to a submersible pump before succumbing. When Lakshmi discovered what had happened, Shettigar pushed her into the well as well. However, her screams alerted a neighbor, Mohammed Nasrathullah, who intervened and saved her. The Mulki police, led by Inspector Kusumadhar, built the case with testimonies from 32 witnesses, including neighbors and family members. The court convicted Shettigar under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for murder, sentencing him to death, and under Section 307 for attempted murder, sentencing him to 10 years in prison. Additionally, the court imposed a fine of ₹10,000 and instructed the District Legal Services Authority to provide financial assistance to Lakshmi, acknowledging the devastating impact on her life.

Source: https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/bengaluru-news/karnataka-man-gets-death-sentence-for-drowning-three-children-in-well-attempting-wife-s-murder-report-101735806574782.html