A sessions court Friday convicted two men of the murder of a 55-year-old woman in Bandra in 2013. They were convicted of charges, including murder and robbery. In 2013, the two men, Saifraza Bhavnagari and Parvez Khan, both with speech and hearing impairments, were booked for the murder of Bandra resident Nalini Chainani.
According to the prosecution, Chainani, with her throat slit, was found in her 10th floor apartment by her husband on June 11, 2013 after he returned from work. The prosecution alleged that the two accused, who were known to the victim, had entered her flat when she was alone around 4 pm and slit her throat and fled with her jewellery and cash. Among the witnesses were the security guard of the building as well as the shopkeeper from whom the accused allegedly purchased the murder weapon, a razor.
The police claimed that a mobile phone left behind at the scene of crime had led them to the two. The prosecution examined over 25 witnesses. The defence had argued that the case was entirely based on circumstantial evidence as no eyewitness had seen them in the flat. The security guard had told the police that he knew the two men as they regularly came to the building and that they would usually visit flats on the 10th floor and the 7th floor.
The defence pointed out that the statements of two witnesses were ‘contradictory’ since the security guard had said he had seen the two leave the building around 5pm, another witness had claimed they were at his shop, one kilometre away from the building buying the alleged murder weapon.
The court relied on circumstantial evidence linking the two to the crime. The court will hear arguments on quantum of punishment on Monday. The two face life imprisonment, or even the maximum punishment of death penalty. The court asked the defence advocates if the accused would want to be heard on the point of sentencing. The court has also summoned an interpreter on Monday for assisting the men, who use sign language, to make their submissions.
Earlier, the court had recorded their statements under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, with help from their parents and lawyers, as an interpreter was not available. Interpreters are usually called for by the court to assist in cases of impairment or any disability to the accused or any witness. The two had given their statements through sign language to the court in October.