MUMBAI: Bombay high court on Friday upheld a 2019 conviction of a Mumbai police officer Shivaji Narawane in a 2013 case of the murder of the son of his alleged ‘paramour’ but acquitted the woman, Nanda Zodge.
Narawane was earlier a senior inspector in Tilak Nagar and met Zodge, when she used to visit the police station to complain about her son, who allegedly had some vices, said the HC. The police officer “visited her house quite often.’’ She was harassed by her son, to a point it had “become unbearable’’ said the additional public prosecutor Prajakta Shinde, citing it as a motive to murder him.
“We are pained to observe that a high ranking police officer, instead of taking action against notorious Rohan in accordance with law, thought it fit to eliminate him by causing his homicidal death and thereafter, attempted to cause disappearance of evidence,’’ said a bench of Justices Sadhana Jadhav and NR Borkar while dismissing his appeal against the conviction.
“No doubt, the horrendous act is committed by him in his individual capacity. At the same time, the fact that he was not true to his oath as a police officer to uphold the rule of law cannot be ignored and hence, (he) does not deserve to be shown any leniency,’’ said the bench.
The Sessions court in Mumbai had sentenced both to life imprisonment. Both are in jail since their arrest in 2013.
The HC directed her release and while confirming his conviction and sentence said Naravane who in 2013 was a DySP attached to Special Protection Unit, Dadar, was “entitled to set off for period spent in jail.’’
Police had on October 25, 2013, found the dead body in a pool of blood, on the steps of his house, throat slit, skull fractured. Police found the knife behind the house, blood stains inside the house and another ‘murder weapon’ a grinding stone with blood stains, behind another building.
The crime had occurred in Tilak Nagar, Chembur in the house where the 25-year-old victim lived with his single mother and sister.
Zodge, 53 and Narawane, 61 denied any role in the appeal field last year.
Narawane’s counsel Mahesh Vishwakarma argued that recovery of the ‘grinding stone’ from an open place was no proof against him and neither was there any evidence to prove his presence in the house with the victim that night.
Zodge’s counsel Aniket Nikam had argued that she was not even at home when the crime allegedly occurred, and cited “serious lapses” in the police probe which did not examine the neighbour or a witness with whom her son had an argument. The HC agreed that the “evidence on record is not sufficient to establish that there was a conspiracy between both the accused to eliminate Rohan (her son).”
But regarding Narawane, the HC said, the fact that he was at home with the victim, who was later found dead in a passage with room locked from outside and a pool of blood in the house, shows he was “brutally assaulted in the house’’.
The HC said, “By logical deduction, it can be safely held that accused No. 1 (Narawane) is the perpetrator of the crime.”
The prosecution established the two co-accused were in a relationship, said the HC adding, their conduct shows they “were fully aware’’ of her son’s “homicidal death’’. The prosecution has proved its case against Narawane, said the HC.
The HC also said it could not be “oblivious’’ to the fact that “people are generally insensitive to crimes and have no inclination to be a part of investigation even if the crime has taken place in their presence.’’
“There is a tendency to keep away from the court unless it is inevitable. They think that crime is also between two individuals, just like civil disputes,’’ said the bench of Justices Jadhav and Borkar. Adding, “Unfortunately so, but this kind of apathy is prevalent in society and therefore, prosecution case cannot be disbelieved only because there is no independent witness examined, especially in cases that rest upon and circumstantial evidence.’’