E-Paper
Pune court convicts man in 2017 Budhwar Peth murder of partner, awards life imprisonment
The prosecution examined 14 witnesses, including the complainant police constable, eyewitnesses, medical officers, panch witnesses and investigating officers
Nearly nine years after a woman was fatally stabbed in Pune’s red-light area, Budhwar Peth, a sessions court has convicted her live-in partner, holding that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that he intentionally murdered her after she refused to accompany him.
District judge and additional sessions judge R K Kshirsagar on July 29 convicted Sukhdev Ramdas Madavi, 27, under sections 302 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC); and sections 37(1) and 135 of the Bombay Police Act. The court sentenced Madavi to life imprisonment and imposed a fine of ₹50,000 for murder, while awarding concurrent sentences for the remaining offences.
According to the prosecution, the incident took place on the night of May 23, 2017, outside Janata building near the food plaza in Budhwar Peth. The victim, Bithi Molla, who was known to the accused and had earlier lived with him, was repeatedly stabbed with a knife in a crowded public place. A police constable on duty witnessed the assault, rushed to intervene and apprehended the accused after sustaining injuries while trying to grab the weapon. The victim was rushed to Sassoon general hospital, where doctors declared her dead.
The prosecution examined 14 witnesses, including the complainant police constable, eyewitnesses, medical officers, panch witnesses and investigating officers. The court found the testimonies of the eyewitnesses to be consistent, natural and trustworthy, noting that they clearly described the accused chasing the victim, grabbing her by the hair and repeatedly stabbing her in the chest and abdomen before attempting to flee.
One of the key prosecution witnesses, police constable Suhas Nanasaheb Salunkhe, testified that while passing by, he saw the accused holding the victim by her hair and stabbing her with a knife. He immediately caught hold of the accused and suffered injuries to his fingers during the struggle. Another police constable joined him and together, they overpowered the accused.
Another eyewitness, Reshma Uhab Ali Shaikh, deposed that she knew both the accused and the victim, who had been in a relationship. She told the court that after a brief altercation, the accused chased Bithi, caught her by the hair and stabbed her repeatedly in the chest and stomach. Reshma, along with others, shifted the victim to Sassoon hospital in an autorickshaw however Bithi succumbed to her injuries.
The post-mortem evidence corroborated the eyewitness accounts. Medical evidence showed that the victim had sustained multiple stab injuries, and the doctor opined that the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of Nature to cause death. The court held that the prosecution had conclusively established that the death was homicidal.
The defence argued that the accused had been falsely implicated and claimed that another woman known as Ganguma, allegedly involved in controlling prostitution in the area, had orchestrated the murder. It also pointed to alleged shortcomings in the investigation and unexplained injuries sustained by the accused.
Rejecting these arguments, the court observed that there was no evidence supporting the defence theory. It noted that eyewitnesses consistently stated that the accused suffered injuries after falling while trying to escape following the attack.
In its judgment, the court observed: “The prosecution evidence is clear that the accused committed an offence. The prosecution proved the clear motive of the accused to commit the offence. He had intention to kill the victim. He came to the spot to take the victim with him and upon her denial, killed her. He intentionally prepared to kill her and brought a knife with him. He accomplished the act by murdering her”.
During sentencing, the prosecution sought capital punishment, arguing that the accused’s conduct showed no possibility of reformation. However, the court held that although the offence was grave, it did not fall within the ‘rarest of rare’ category warranting the death penalty.
“The offence is serious. However, it seems that the case does not fall within the category of rarest of rare cases,” the court observed before sentencing the accused to life imprisonment.
The court directed that all sentences will run concurrently and granted the accused the benefit of set-off for the period spent in custody from May 24, 2017 to November 29, 2024. It also ordered that the seized knife be disposed of in accordance with the law after the appeal period and that the bloodstained clothes be destroyed.
