"Deserves No Sympathy": Bombay High Court Enhances Punishment, Sentences Watchman To Death For Employer's Dacoity & Murder

A division bench of Justices VK Jadhav and Shrikant Kulkarni upheld the life imprisonment awarded to five accused but enhanced watchman Shiv Kumar Saket's punishment on the State's appeal as he had "betrayed the trust of his employer."

On December 2, 2007, between 9.30-10.30 pm the accused tricked the watchman on night duty (Sumitkumar Tiwari), tied him to a pole and entered bungalow 'Basant,' the residence of middle-aged businessman Ramesh Munot and his wife Chitra.

Ramesh was found lying in the living room in a pool of his blood having been stabbed in his heart and forehead multiple times, his mouth sealed shut with a tape. Chitra was tied to a chair with the telephone wire, with her throat slit. Her mouth was gagged by her own saari.

Jewellery, foreign currency and other articles worth Rs. 9 lakhs were stolen.

"The respondents-accused persons have committed the crime with premeditation and it involves extreme brutality…They have committed gruesome, brutal murder of two middle aged helpless and hapless persons out of lust for money and ornaments. It was a pre-planned, calculated, cold blooded murder. This crime resulted in public abhorrence and shocked the judicial conscience and the conscience of the society."

The court observed that the couple, completely dependent on their security was betrayed by them. While Saket was the couple's day watchman, accused Shailendra Singh Thakur was removed from employment for sexually harassing a female co-worker. Convicts Rajesh Singh Thakur was also previously working as a watchman, while Raju Darode was their former driver. All the watchmen hailed from Madhya Pradesh.

The High Court appreciated the investigation by the Investigating officer Tukaram Vahile. Even in the absence of direct evidence, all circumstantial evidence pointed towards the convicts.

A dog-squad led the police from the blood-stained knife towards Ahmednagar Railway Station platform, from where some of the accused were arrested. The convicts had purchased tickets to leave the city soon after the murders. They had also bought adhesive tapes, scarfs and knives.

Witnesses identified them loitering around the bungalow on the day of the incident, and also a day before. Forensic evidence showed blood stains on their clothes. Significantly, during a short period of 48 hours the jewellery and electronic items were recovered from them.

The trial court found them guilty and sentenced the six accused to live imprisonment for committing acts under sections 302, 396, 397, 412, 452, 120-B r.w. 34 of the Penal Code and section 25 of the Arms Act on October 21, 2013.

Nearly 60 witnesses were examined in the case.

While the Maharashtra government sought enhancement of punishment in appeal (death penalty), the accused filed an appeal for acquittal.

APP Shashibhushan P. Deshmukh argued that a pre-planned, calculated, cold blooded murder has always been regarded as one of the aggravated kind, and would justify imposition of the death penalty on the murderer.

Conversely, advocate AY Pandule appointed by the court submitted that the accused's age was a mitigating circumstance and there was a possibility of reformation. Also they had no criminal antecedents.

The application of certain principles is now guided by Sections 354(3) and 235(2) of CrPC which states that the extreme penalty can be inflicted only in gravest cases of extreme culpability and that due regard much be paid to the accused.

The bench observed that the night-time watchman Sumitkumar Tiwari was the most important witness in the case as he had seen and identified the accused on the night of the murder.

Regarding Saket the court said that he "deserves no sympathy." He was on the day duty as watchman on the said Basant bungalow. He was knowing well the activities of deceased Ramesh Munot and deceased Chitra Munot. The other accused persons had come to him and accordingly, he executed the plan in a very calculated manner. We have also observed in our judgment that this is a rarest of rare case. In our considered opinion, respondent no.3-original accused no.3 Shivkumar Ramsundar Saket deserves no sympathy."

The court noted Saket's betrayal that set him apart from the other convicts.

"The crime has been committed under no duress, nor on provocation. On the other hand, two innocent lives were snuffed out. The murders were gruesome, brutal and diabolic. The crime has been committed with extreme depravity and in a merciless manner. It falls in the category of rarest of rare case. In our considered opinion, it merits the death penalty to the extent of accused no.3 Shivkumar Ramsundar Saket. In the facts of the present case, age of accused no.3 Shivkumar Ramsundar Saket cannot be considered as a mitigating circumstance."

Case Title: Shailendrasingh Shivmurtisingh Thakur and Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra, with connected matters

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 128