An IT professional was given the death sentence and his woman colleague and lover handed the life term, for killing her three-year-old daughter and mother-in-law and attempting to murder her husband in 2014. The court, while handing the sentence, said the woman’s conduct was an “insult to motherhood”.
Principal Sessions Judge V Shersy also slapped a fine of over Rs 50 lakh each on the accused- Nino Mathew and Anu Shanti, both software engineers. Out of the fine amount, the court directed to pay Rs 50 lakh to Anu Shanti’s husband Lijesh, who lost his daughter and Rs 30 lakh to Thankappan Chettiyar, whose wife was murdered by Nino Mathew.
While delivering the sentence, the judge observed that it was “the rarest of the rare case” and termed the crime as a “brutal” and “heinous” one. The judge also said though Anu Shanti had actively participated in the crime, she was being exempted from the extreme punishment as she is a woman.
However, the court said she was an “insult to motherhood”.
The court also said the killing of the three-year-old child and 60-year-old hapless woman was a cold-blooded murder just for lust.
After pronouncement of the judgement, Public Prosecutor Vineet Kumar said he was fully satisfied with the verdict.
Nino Mathew and Anu Shanti, both working with an IT company in Technopark here, were found guilty by the court last week under various sections of IPC, including 120B (conspiracy), 302 (murder), 307 (attempt to murder), 449 (criminal trespassing), 201 (destruction of evidence) and 380 (theft) and 67A of the IT Act.
Nino Mathew had brutally hacked to death his paramour Anu Shanti’s daughter Swastika and mother-in-law Omana (60) and also made a vain attempt to murder her husband Lijesh, who escaped with injuries.
Nino, after committing the twin murders, had waited for nearly half an hour at the crime spot for Lijesh, who was not at home at the time of the incident.
Lijesh, who was attacked, managed to run out of the house and alert the neighbours, leading to Mathew’s arrest.
His statement identifying the accused was the crucial evidence in the case. Forty-nine witnesses were examined and 85 documents used as evidence, besides 41 pieces of material evidence.
Video clippings, seized from the laptop of the accused, were also accepted as evidence by the court.