Hair clumps at crime scene key proof of brutal assault on Jhanvi Kukreja: Court

Scattered clumps of hair found at the crime scene constituted ldquoclinching evidencerdquo to show that Mumbai teenager Jhanvi Kukreja was brutally assaulted before being murdered in 2021 a city court held while sentencing her friend Shree Jogdhankar to life imprisonment in the caseThe court had however acquitted the victimrsquos other friend and coaccused Diya Padalkar observing that her ldquocomplicity in the commission of the crimerdquo was doubtfulThe sentence was pronounced on January 31 while the detailed order was made available on TuesdayKukreja 19 was killed on January 1 2021 in a building at Khar in western Mumbai while attending a New Yearrsquos Eve party According to police she was assaulted on the staircase and murdered after the party on the buildingrsquos terraceThe prosecution alleged that the teenager was dragged down the stairs from the fifth floor after a fight broke out among the three friends over Jogdhankarrsquos intimacy with PadalkarAdditional Sessions Judge Satyanarayan Navandar convicted Jogdhankar for murder under relevant provisions of the Indian Penal CodeKhar NYE murder Violent scuffle took place on staircase concludes courtIn the reasoned order the court concluded that a violent scuffle took place on the staircase between the eighth and second floors of the building as the group was leaving the terraceWhile there were no eyewitnesses to the actual killing the judge relied on what he described as a ldquocomplete chain of circumstancesrdquo The court rejected the defence theory of an accidental fall or suicide noting that Jogdhankarrsquos failure to raise an alarm or assist the victim was highly incriminatingldquoThese arguments cannot be accepted The mental state of the deceased was not such as would lead her to commit suicide There was no reason for a young girl to end her liferdquo the court ruledIt further observed that had the incident been suicidal or accidental the conduct of accused No 1 would have been entirely differentldquoHe would not have left the spot without attending to the deceased Instead the accused would have raised an alarm called other partygoers and made efforts to save her liferdquo the court saidThe judge also noted that the victim would not have ldquosustained numerous injuries as noted in the postmortem reportrdquo had it been an accidental fall or suicideKhar NYE murder Court cites clumps of hair as lsquoclinching evidencersquo of assault rejects FIR delay claimsFurther the court said there was no explanation for large amounts of the victimrsquos hair being found scattered at the sceneBunches of hair recovered from the spot and on the staircases of the second and first floors indicated a fierce assault the court observedldquoThe scattered bunches of hair are clinching evidence of violence showing how brutally she was assaulted just before her fallrdquo it saidThe defence argument regarding delay in the registration of the FIR was also rejected with the court holding that the police had followed a proper course of investigationPolice officers first conducted a preliminary inquiry by gathering material from witnesses present at the party and after arriving at a tentative conclusion registered the FIR the court notedldquoNo intention to delay the registration of the FIR can be attributed either to the police machinery or to the victim in the caserdquo it addedShree Jogdhankar assaulted Jhanvi Kukreja pushed her from staircaseOn the basis of evidence on record the court held that the victim appeared to have been pushed or thrown from the staircase resulting in fatal head injuriesDuring the fight Jogdhankar furiously assaulted Kukreja pulled her hair and ultimately pushed her from the staircase the court saidThe judge observed that if a person is pushed or thrown from the second floor there is every possibility of death and hence the act committed by Jogdhankar ldquoamounts to murderrdquoThe court also emphasised that Jogdhankarrsquos postincident conduct played a crucial role in establishing his guiltIt noted that he failed to give details of his injuries and provided a false history to the doctor treating him at the hospitalWhen contacted by friends after the incident Jogdhankar remained ldquocoolheaded and indifferentrdquo and did not mention the victimrsquos fall the court saidldquoAll these activities of the accused No 1 postincident are suggestive of his culpabilityrdquo it ruledAs far as Padalkar was concerned the judge said the prosecution had proved her presence at the scene of the crime but her ldquocomplicity in the commission of the crimerdquo had not been establishedNo common intention between the two accused to commit murder was proved and therefore Padalkar was entitled to the benefit of doubt the court heldWith PTI inputs