Delhi Court Sentences Two Men to Life Imprisonment for Murder, Kidnapping, and Evidence Destruction
A recent judgment by the Rohini District Court in Delhi has led to two men receiving life imprisonment for their involvement in a heinous crime that included murder, kidnapping, and destruction of evidence. The case, which dates back to 2017, involved the tragic death of Om Hare, whose body was disposed of after being kidnapped by the accused.
The court, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Vandana, handed down the sentence on July 4. Navrattan alias Kale and Naushad were found guilty of the offenses and were sentenced to life in prison. The judge emphasized the gravity of the crime, stating that the nature of the offense committed was extremely serious. According to the court’s order, the deceased was kidnapped with premeditated planning and then brutally murdered. Both convicts were responsible for disposing of his body, further compounding the severity of their actions.
In addition to the life sentence, the court imposed a fine of Rs 20,000 on each of the accused. During the sentencing arguments, the additional public prosecutor, Vinit Dahiya, argued that the convicts deserved no leniency. He described the case as falling under the category of “the rarest of rare cases,” urging the court to impose the maximum punishment possible.
Dahiya highlighted the brutal nature of the crime, emphasizing that the victim had been subjected to extreme violence. His arguments focused on the need for justice and the importance of setting an example to deter similar crimes in the future.
On the other hand, the defense counsel for the accused sought leniency. They presented several arguments, including the fact that one of the convicts, Naushad, has two minor children who are entirely dependent on him. This point aimed to evoke sympathy and highlight the personal circumstances of the accused.
Another argument put forward by the defense was that both convicts come from poor backgrounds. The counsel for Navrattan submitted that this should be taken into consideration when determining the sentence. They also pointed out that the convicts have no prior criminal records and have spent a significant amount of time in judicial custody—seven years and ten months.
This lengthy period of detention was cited as a factor that could justify a more lenient approach. However, the court ultimately decided that the severity of the crime warranted the harshest punishment available under the law.
The case underscores the challenges faced by the judiciary in balancing the need for justice with the circumstances of the accused. While the defense attempted to present mitigating factors, the court’s decision reflects its commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring that such heinous acts do not go unpunished.
The ruling serves as a reminder of the importance of thorough investigations and the role of the legal system in delivering fair and just outcomes. It also highlights the emotional and social impact of violent crimes on families and communities, reinforcing the need for strong legal deterrents.
