A caretaker and her boyfriend have been handed triple life sentences for the brutal murder of an elderly couple in Bandra
Police arrested Khaka and Ekka on June 22, 2018, at Nagpur railway station while they were travelling towards Odisha on the Gitanjali Express. Jewellery and other valuables were recovered from them, along with two Dadar-Jharsuguda railway tickets issued at 5.19 am on June 21. Beauty parlour owner Sueyha Chin testified that Khaka had accompanied Daya to her salon on June 20, hours before the murders. Public prosecutor Keshav Salunke presented evidence from 35 witnesses. Khaka claimed she had left after learning that her mother was ill in Odisha and that Daya and Nanak had permitted her to go, giving her Rs 2,000.
The court said the prosecution had established the “last scene theory” and rejected the defence claim that another person could have entered through the kitchen window. The court relied on witness testimony, CCTV footage, medical findings, recoveries and the accused’s conduct. Auto driver Lavkush Rajbhar identified Khaka and Ekka as the pair he dropped near Bandra bridge after they sought a ride to Dadar. Ekka raised a similar defence. The judge rejected their version, noting that Khaka had summoned Ekka to Mumbai and enabled him to access the flat, and that neither had informed others about her departure.
MUMBAI: A caretaker and her boyfriend have been sentenced to triple life imprisonment for murdering an elderly couple and robbing their home in an upscale Bandra locality in 2018. Additional Sessions Judge VB Bohra sentenced caretaker Parvati Khaka (26) and her boyfriend Singhasan Ekka (26) to life imprisonment for murdering Nanak (85) and Daya Makhijani (81) and voluntarily causing hurt while committing robbery. Khaka was also given seven years’ rigorous imprisonment for theft by a servant, while Ekka received 10 years for house trespass.
A sessions court on Thursday rejected the death penalty, saying the case did not qualify as “rarest of rare”. The court rejected the prosecution’s plea for the death penalty, saying the case did not fall under the “rarest of rare” category, particularly as it relied on circumstantial evidence and considered the accused’s conduct in jail and scope for reformation. All sentences will run concurrently.
