The final arguments in the much-discussed Kopardi minor girl rape and murder case began before a special court (POCSO Act) at Ahmednagar in western Maharashtra on Thursday, with the Prosecution seeking to make out a foolproof case against one of the three accused as having indulged in the heinous crime and two others conspiring with the prime accused in the crime.
Opening the final arguments before the court of Ahmednagar district Sessions Judge Suvarna Keole, Special Prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam briefed the court the circumstances leading to the rape and “homicidal death” of the 15-year-old victim and said that the entire case was based on “circumstantial evidence”. Nikam said that the prosecution had relied 21 pieces of crucial evidence that it had adduced to construct a complete chain of events leading to the rape and murder of the victim girl in July last year, which sparked a public uproar in Maharashtra.
The Prosecution’s case was that the victim girl, who belonged to the dominant Maratha community, was brutally raped on the night of July 13, 2016 allegedly by three Dalits who inflicted injuries all over her body and broke her limbs before throttling her at Kopardi village in Ahmednagar district.
The fast-track court had on November 9 last year framed charges against three accused — Jitendra alias Pappu Babulal Shinde (26), Santosh Gorkha Bhawal (30) and Nitin Gopinath Bhailume (28) —under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POSCO) Act for allegedly perpetrating a sexual assault on the victim girl and strangulating her to death.
Adducing the evidence mustered by the Prosecution, Nikam told the court the victim girl was found dead in the vicinity of Kopardi village, with her both shoulders dislocated, three of her ribs fractured, injuries on her private parts and bite marks on her breasts. The post-mortem conducted on the victim girl that she had died due to asphyxia.
Nikam said that as per the evidence given by an eye-witness, Jitendra Shinde, who had strong lust for the victim girl, had eve-teased and molested the girl, two days prior to the incident, that too in the presence of Santosh Bhawal (accused n0 two) and Nitin Gopinath Bhilume (accused number three), who were seen laughing at the manner in which the prime accused was harassing the girl.
According to the Prosecution, there was evidence to prove that Jitendra Shinde (accused number one) had perpetrated sexual assault on the victim girl and also strangled her to death. However, there was no medical evidence to prove that the accused number two and three had indulged in the actual sexual crime, a fact that demolishes the investigators’ initial charge that all the three accused had gang-raped the victim girl. While beginning his final arguments, Nikam sought to lay the blame for the delay in the conduct of the minor girl’s rape and murder trial at the defence lawyer’s door, by saying that he had completed the examination of 31 Prosecution witnesses as early as January/ February this year.
However, defence advocate Balasaheb Khopade, who along with his lawyer-daughter Vijayalaxmi Khopade are representing the accused number two Santosh Bhawal in the case, contested Nikam’s claim that the defence lawyers had delayed the trial and said the Prosecution might have completed the examination of its witnesses early, but the defence not only had to cross-examine the Prosecution’s witnesses but also had to fight legally for the production of six defence witnesses, including Special Public Prosecutor Nikam himself. It may be recalled that Ahmednagar district Sessions Judge (Mrs) Suvarna Keole had in her July 10 order rejected the defence lawyer’s plea seeking to make Public Prosecutor Nikam and five others defence witnesses in the case.
Defence lawyer Vijayalaxmi Khopade – along with another lawyer Rakesh Rathod – moved Aurangabad bench of the Bombay HC against the trial court’s order. Temporarily staying the trial, the high court had allowed the examination of only one defence witness Rajendra Chavan, while partially admitting a criminal revision petition moved by two defence lawyers.’
Subsequently, the Supreme Court dismissed a Special leave Petition (SlP) filed by Vijayalaxmi and Rathod challenging the August 3, 2018 order of the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay High Court.
Defence lawyers Rakesh Rathod and Vijayalaxmi, representing the accused number two, have meanwhile filed a review petition in the apex court’s order before the same bench that dismissed their plea challenging the high court’s order.
During Thursday’s final arguments, Advocate Balasaheb Khopade also objected to SSP Nikam’s effort to impress upon the trial court about the political importance of the rape and murder case, by saying that the political issues had no relevance to the evidence being adduced in the case.
The final arguments will continue on Friday.