Abolish Death Penalty India: (Uttar Pradesh) Meerut court sentences woman, lover to death for strangling husband, staging snakebite death

Friday, October 16, 2026

(Uttar Pradesh) Meerut court sentences woman, lover to death for strangling husband, staging snakebite death

16 Oct 2026, 4:35 pm

As per the details of the case, Ravita and Amardeep bought a snake from a snake charmer for ₹1,000.

Representative Image Photo | IANS

LUCKNOW: Close on the heels of the death penalty awarded to the accused couple in the infamous blue drum case of Meerut, another couple — Ravita and her lover Amardeep — were sentenced to death on Friday for murdering Ravita’s husband and making it appear that his death was due to a snakebite.

Before the sentence was announced, Additional District Judge (ADJ-12) and Sessions Judge Jaiveer Singh Nagar heard the final statements of both jailed accused through video conferencing.

While replying to the judge, Ravita pleaded that she had three young children and that someone should be there to take care of them. She then fell silent. Amardeep said his parents were old and had no one to look after them. He requested that their care should not be neglected. After this, both broke down and began weeping.

Amit Kashyap was a resident of Akbarpur Sadat village under the jurisdiction of Bahsuma police station in Meerut district. Amardeep worked with Amit installing tiles and stone and used to frequent his house. During this time, Amardeep grew close to Ravita. Amit became aware of the relationship, after which Ravita and Amardeep conspired to kill him. On the night of April 17, 2025, Ravita and Amardeep allegedly strangled Amit Kashyap, Ravita’s husband, to death. They then left a snake on the bed to make it appear that he had died of a snakebite. A live snake was found beneath the victim’s body.

As per the details of the case, Ravita and Amardeep bought a snake from a snake charmer for ₹1,000. On the night of April 17, after Amit had gone to sleep, Ravita called her boyfriend Amardeep to the house. They strangled Amit and then released the snake on his bed. Ravita sent her boyfriend away and went to sleep in another room.

When the family woke up in the morning, they found Amit dead. There were marks on his body that appeared to be snakebites. His family believed he had died from a snakebite and called a snake charmer, who caught the snake and took it away.

Though the post-mortem report revealed 10 bite marks on the victim’s body, it was ascertained that Amit had been strangled. The snake charmers also told investigators that the snake had no fangs and could not have caused the death.Based on suspicion, police first detained Ravita. During questioning, she named Amardeep. When police interrogated both of them, they confessed to the crime.

The investigation later revealed that the snake used to stage the bite was neither venomous nor did it have fangs. Ravita remained in Meerut jail since then, while Amardeep was released on bail.

Police filed the charge sheet within 60 days of the murder. The case was heard in the court of ACJM-12 Jaiveer Singh Nagar. The court delivered the verdict after 551 days of trial, 87 hearings and testimony from 12 witnesses.

On October 7, the court found Ravita and Amardeep guilty of murder. The judge also directed the District Magistrate of Meerut to ensure the care of the couple’s three children. Ravita and Amardeep were produced in court. Special Public Prosecutor Farzana Maqsood represented the prosecution, while Ravita and Amardeep’s lawyers, Omkar Singh Bhati and Balraj, the lawyer representing the deceased Amit, presented their arguments. The hearing lasted for around an hour.

Source: https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/uttar-pradesh/2026/Oct/16/meerut-court-sentences-woman-lover-to-death-for-strangling-husband-staging-snakebite-death

No comments:

Post a Comment

The Death Penalty Scenario in India

India is one of 193 countries that retains the death penalty. Some judges have delivered landmark verdicts upholding the rights of death row prisoners, while debates continue advocating abolition or reform of sentencing policies. The Indian government remains committed to retention, asserting executions occur only in “rarest of rare” cases. The death penalty applies to crimes including murder, kidnapping, terrorism, desertion, inducement to suicide of a minor or mentally-retarded person, and in certain cases of rape. Outrage over child rape and murder has intensified these discussions. After an unofficial eight-year moratorium, the government executed Ajmal Kasab (Mumbai attacks) in 2012 and Afzal Guru (Parliament attack) in 2013, both covertly and immediately after mercy petitions were rejected. Prior to this, Dhananjoy Chatterjee was executed in 2004 after 13 years on death row. Following these, many mercy petitions have been rejected, creating fear among death row convicts. Courts continue to hand down death sentences at an increasing rate. Empirical studies highlight the plight of death row prisoners. The India Exclusion Report 2017-18 found fair trial rights largely denied, with convicts often marginalized by caste, religion, poverty, and education. The Death Penalty Research Project (2015) documented socio-economic profiles and experiences of death row prisoners. Dr. Reena Mary George’s studies (2014, 2009) emphasized poverty, social exclusion, and dignity as central to death row experiences, and examined the human rights impact of the penalty. According to the National Crime Records Bureau 2015, 101 prisoners were on death row, with many sentences commuted to life. The “rarest of rare” doctrine introduced by the Supreme Court in the 1980s has not substantially limited death sentences, which have increased over the decades. Justice Joseph (2018) reaffirmed the Bachan Singh judgment but urged restriction of the death penalty to only those cases meeting its criteria. While updating the blog and conducting my own empirical studies, I observed the heinous nature of the crimes that were committed and thought about the families, about their loss, about the victims who for no fault of their own died. If I lost my relative or a dear friend, would I still oppose death penalty and would I still advocate to abolish the death sentence? Having worked in the criminal justice system and also having the seen the other side, where often it is the marginalized, vulnerable and oppressed who are on death row makes me want to advocate for abolition of this punishment. Victims should definitely get justice for their loss, for their pain. No one should escape the rule of law. As long as humanity exists; crime will exist. Should we not re-consider our sentencing policies? Reena Mary George