Dowry death: Bombay high court commutes Maharashtra man’s death sentence to life term
The Bombay high court spared a 32-year-old Dhule resident the gallows, but sentenced him to a minimum of 30 years in prison for brutally killing his wife over dowry, just two months after their marriage.mumbai Updated: Mar 23, 2017 14:23 IST
The Bombay high court spared a 32-year-old Dhule resident the gallows, but sentenced him to a minimum of 30 years in prison for brutally killing his wife over dowry, just two months after their marriage.
A division bench of justices SS Shinde and KK Sonawane took lenient view of Nitin Gaikwad’s age and his his unblemished past. He was a driver employed with a local agricultural college.
However, noticing that the circumstances on record showed that the murder was committed in extremely brutal, gruesome and painful manner, the bench sentenced him to life imprisonment and prohibited his release before he serves 30 years in jail without remission — annual deductions in the prison term.
According to the prosecution, the incident took place at night on July 24, 2014. The incident came to light the next day when neighbours’ knocks on the couple’s door was not responded to. They informed the local police.
The police found Gaikwad and his wife, Pranita, lying in a pool of blood. She had sustained deep cuts on her throat and her husband was found to be injured with gashes on his wrist and other parts of the hand and some bruises on his throat. They were taken to a civil hospital, where Pranita was declared brought dead, and Gaikwad was treated for his injuries.
The post mortem revealed that Pranita had sustained 10 deep cuts on her neck and throat. Gaikwad’s brother and parents were harassing the victim as her father had agreed to pay them Rs2 lakh as dowry, but he could manage Rs1.50 lakh.
On November 10, 2016, a trial court sentenced Gaikwad to death terming the murder extremely diabolical.
The high court upheld his conviction for murder holding that the evidence brought on record by the prosecution proved beyond doubt that the offence was committed by Gaikwad. The court also rejected his contention that somebody else assaulted him and his wife at night.