Chintan Upadhyay case | Court says no conspiracy to kill Hema’s lawyer: ‘Was killed because he accompanied her’

The court also sentenced three others — Vijay Rajbhar, Pradeep Rajbhar, and Shivkumar Rajbhar — to life imprisonment on charges of murdering Hema and her lawyer Bhambhani.

The lawyer, who practiced in various civil courts, including family courts, was representing Hema in her matrimonial dispute and divorce proceedings against Chintan.

In the detailed order, made available Wednesday, additional sessions judge Shrikant Y Bhosale said, “So far the allegation of conspiracy for murdering Bhambhani, there appears no satisfactory evidence. However, he was murdered only because, unfortunately, he accompanied Hema and found himself in a trap led by the accused.”

On December 11, 2015, Bhambhani had decided to accompany Hema, after she received a call from a person claiming to be Chintan’s cook, asking her to visit him for information on Chintan which could help her in the case against him, according to the court’s order.

Bhambhani’s younger daughter Anita and his wife, Poonam, had deposed during the trial.

Bhambhani’s residence also served as his office space to meet some clients. Among the clients was Hema, who would often visit the Matunga residence of the Bhambhanis in connection with the case against Chintan.

Anita in her deposition had told the court that the family had then met Hema and would often interact with her.

She said that with the passing of time, Hema had become like a close family member for them. Anita had also told the court that her father decided to accompany Hema on the day of the murders as she had an apprehension of being cheated by the caller.

While they first proceeded towards Andheri in his car, Anita called her father around 8pm for an OTP received in his phone and he told her that they were headed to Malad for a meeting with one Vidyadhar Rajbhar — an absconding accused in the case.

When Anita found that her father had not returned home, she tried calling him.

After both Hema and her father’s phone went unanswered, she approached the Matunga police station to file a missing complaint.

On the next day, a waste collector spotted two suspicious looking boxes in a nullah and alerted the police.

The bodies of a male and female were found wrapped in the two boxes. The police searched for a match in the missing complaints filed in the city. Anita was called to identify the body suspected to be that of her father.

“I can never forget that day. Along with the grief we were engulfed with, we also had to ensure that justice was done for my father. Despite being a lawyer, my father never encouraged us to see courts and would have never imagined that I would visit courts to be here so often during this trial. But, I knew I had to fight for him. Though I know he will not return, the judgment punishing those who caused his death, brings some closure,” Anita said outside the court after the verdict on Tuesday.

Absconding accused

Meanwhile, the main accused in the case, Vidyadhar Rajbhar, the fabricator who worked with both Hema and Chintan, was not found after the murder. The court said that while the police had not shown Vidyadhar as an absconding accused in the chargesheet, throughout the trial he was referred to as an absconding accused. The court said the prosecution had accepted the mistake that he was not referred to as an absconding accused but he will be prosecuted whenever he is traced.

“From the above it is clear that said Vidyadhar Rajbhar is also an accused and therefore, all the evidence, exhibits, articles and record and proceeding needs to be preserved for the trial against said Vidyadhar Rajbhar. It is therefore necessary to pass order for preserving the record and proceeding, all seized articles etc. till further order or till conclusion of the trial against said Vidyadhar Rajbhar,” the court said.