New Delhi, Sep 26 (PTI) A court here has convicted a man for murdering his 74-year-old grandmother to commit robbery in 2015, saying the circumstances proved by the prosecution pointed only towards the his guilt and no other hypothesis was possible.
Additional Sessions Judge Shefali Sharma was hearing the case against Harshit Jain against whom the Prashant Vihar police station had registered a case under penal provisions of murder and robbery or dacoity with an attempt to cause death or hurt grievously.
According to the prosecution, Harshit had murdered his grandmother Kailashwati by hitting her head with a metallic jug and strangulating her with a shawl on December 19, 2015, in Ballabh Vihar Society, Sector-13, Rohini with the motive to commit robbery.
In its 87-page order passed on September 9, the court said the prosecution had established several facts regarding the case including Harshit’s presence, his motive, recoveries based on his disclosure, the accused’s conduct after the crime and medical and forensic evidence linking him with the offences.
It took note of the CCTV footage, where Harshit and his juvenile accomplice were seen entering and then exiting the society in “suspicious circumstances”.
Noting the medical and forensic evidence, the court said, “It can be safely concluded that the death was caused by the ligature material (shawl) and other injuries by the metallic jug which was recovered at the instance of the accused and had the same DNA profile (of the deceased).” Regarding the motive, it said cash and jewellery items, which were found missing according to the testimonies of Harshit’s uncle and grandfather, were later recovered at the accused’s instance.
“In the present case, the accused was certainly having ample opportunity to murder his grandmother as there was no one else in the house, and the accused using the said opportunity, wanted to take away the money and the jewellery,” said the court.
It said Harshit could have easily overpowered an elderly female. The court also said Harshit’s “mysterious conduct” after the crime “spoke volumes about his crime”.
“Firstly, he takes a story of going and meeting his grandfather, and giving him some juice which falls flat in the wake of the CCTV footage proved by the prosecution and the consequent recovery and DNA analysis report.
“After committing the offence, he mysteriously hides along with his associate in Sulabh Shauchalaya (public toilet) from where the recovery of the case property had been made including the blood stained paper, knife, blood stained pants etc,” said the court.
It said Harshit also hid the metallic jug, which was used to inflict injuries, in the kitchen and it was later recovered at his instance.
“As the accused did not usually reside there (in the grandparents’ house), it was incumbent upon him to explain as to why he had gone to the said house. Story of giving juice to his grandfather falls flat…,” said the court.
Rejecting the argument of the defence counsel about the planting of evidence, it said although disclosure was a weak piece of evidence, the various recoveries were with the accused’s “special knowledge” and it was incumbent upon Harshit to especially explain the presence of metal jug inside the kitchen of the flat as it was not a place of easy access to any third person.
It said by applying the principle of confirmation by subsequent events, the recoveries were “a relevant fact and a link in the chain of circumstances”.
According to the principle, if any fact is discovered as a search made on the strength of any information obtained from an arrestee, such a discovery is a guarantee that the information supplied by the prisoner is true.
The doctrine says even if the information is confessional or non-inculpatory but results in discovery of a fact, it becomes a reliable information.
“Thus, all the circumstances as proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt points only towards the guilt of the accused and no other hypothesis is possible. The circumstances proved are conclusive in nature and complete the chain of events,” it said convicting him for the offences of murder and robbery.
The court has posted the arguments on the quantum of sentencing on October 22. PTI MNR MNR KSS KSS
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.