2014 Techie’s rape-murder in Mumbai: SC acquits man on death row

Justice Viswanathan, writing for the bench, said, “… all these facts cumulatively constrain us to conclude that there are gaping holes in the prosecution story leading to the irresistible conclusion that there is something more than what meets the eye in this case. While the old adage, witness may lie but not the circumstances, may be correct, however, the circumstances adduced, as held by this court, should be fully established. There is a legal distinction between ‘may be proved’ and ‘must be or should be proved’ as held by this Court.”

The victim, working with a software company in Mumbai and staying at a woman’s hostel, had gone missing on January 5, 2014, after alighting a train at Lokmanya Tilak Terminus (LTT) railway station in 2014. She was returning from Hyderabad after spending Christmas with her parents.

On January 16, 2014, her body was recovered from the bushes near Express Highway in a burnt state. Her father identified her from a ring on her finger. According to the chemical analysis report, a “head injury with smothering associated with genital injuries” led to her death.

On March 2, 2014, Sanap was arrested based on camera footage from LTT in which he was seen accompanying the victim on January 5 as she was coming out of platform No. 4, around 5 am. According to prosecution, the man allegedly gave her a lift, and raped and killed her on the way and abandoned the body in bushes.

The SC judgment said, “The circumstances relied upon when stitched together do not lead to sole hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and we do not find that the chain is so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused.”

Sanap’s counsel contended that the Digital Video Recorder from which the footage was recovered, stored recordings only for 12 days after which they get automatically deleted. The counsel contended that life span of footage would have been only till January 17, 2014 but the panchnama was drawn and pen drives with footage were taken only on January 18, 2014. Hence, CCTV footage was not reliable, it was argued.

The SC said, “We find that the infirmities referred to by the defence namely, about the lifespan of the CCTV footage in DVR-II being 12 days; the absence of identification of both the appellant and deceased in the same footage by the witnesses; the absence of explanation as to how the police knew that the person PW (prosecution witness) -18 and 19 were speaking to was the same person in the footage and other infirmities raised have not been adequately answered by the prosecution in its evidence.”

The judgement said the test identification parade held on March 25, 2014 “leaves much to be desired as the photograph of appellant was all over the place in the media, as early as on March 4, 2014.”