Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction & Life Term Of Watchman For Killing Corporate Lawyer Pallavi Purkayastha

The Bombay High Court today upheld the conviction of a watchman convicted for the murder of a female corporate lawyer Pallavi Purkayastha, in Mumbai's Wadala area in August 2012.

A division bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Dr Neela Gokhale upheld the conviction and the punishment of one Sajjad Ahmed Abdul Aziz Mugal alias Pathan, who was sentenced to life term by a sessions court in the city.

"The evidence on record, when assessed in its entirety, establishes the guilt of the Appellant (Sajjad) beyond all reasonable doubt. The observations of the Trial Court are compelling and do not warrant any interference. The prosecution has established its case beyond all reasonable doubts based on legal, admissible and cogent evidence," the bench said.

As regards no fixed term imposed by the trial court, the bench clarified, "This Court, as a Constitutional Court has the power to impose a modified punishment providing for any specific term of incarceration or till the end of the convict's life as an alternate to death penalty. We, are of the view that interests of justice will be met in sentencing the convict to Rigorous Imprisonment for life, which will mean imprisonment till the end of his natural life. He will not be entitled to the grant of parole or furlough. We deem this appropriate based on the conduct of the convict who has on previous occasion absconded and was returned to prison after a period of 1 and half year from near the Pakistan border."

The judges therefore, dismissed the two appeals against the July 2014 judgment of the sessions court, one by Sajjad and the other by the State.

While Sajjad sought acquittal from the case, the State pressed for enhancement of sentence from life term to death penalty. 

Pallavi's father Atanu Purkayastha too had filed a revision application seeking enhancement of sentence to death. The same has also been dismissed. 

Notably, on August 9, 2012 Sajjad, who worked as a watchman at Pallavi's building, deliberately tripped her apartment's electricity due to which, she called an electrician. He accompanied the electrician.

Sajjad then took the keys of her flat and later tried to force himself on her but she tried to defend herself and during this altercation, he stabbed her with a knife and fled from the spot. He was subsequently arrested and was held guilty of the murder in July 2014 and was handed over life sentence.

As a convict, Sajjad in February 2016 was released on parole on the ground that he wanted to visit his ailing mother at his hometown in Kashmir. However, he never visited his ailing mother and instead changed identity and worked as a watchman at another building in Andheri. He was, however, arrested after a period of one year of jumping his parole leave.

In its 79-page detailed judgment, the judges noted that the prosecution proved almost all the possible aspects of the case, right from motive, to the last seen theory, forensic evidence, etc to establish Sajjad's guilt. 

"The motive for commission of the offence is established. Sajjad wanted to have sexual relations with Pallavi. The witnesses established as much that Sajjad expressed his desire while in Pallavi's flat itself. Pallavi's neighbour saw Sajjad outside her flat at 01:30 a.m. on the pretext that Avik (her fiancé) had called him, when Sajjad was fully aware that Avik was not at home. Sajjad is the last person seen outside Pallavi's flat with clear intent in entering it. The following morning, Pallavi is found dead; there is a pool of blood in the flat, outside the flat, near the lift. Sajjad is nowhere to be seen when he was supposed to be on duty," the judgment authored by Justice Gokhale reads. 

Further, the judges noted how Sajjad called up two witnesses (drivers) and confessed his guilt while seeking monetary help to return to his native land.

"There are unexplained injuries on his person which are consistent with the scuffle he had with Pallavi. All these established facts are consistent with Sajjad's guilt and the chain of evidence is so complete as there is no reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with his innocence. In all human probability, the act of murder of the deceased is done by the Sajjad," the bench held. 

With these observations, the bench dismissed the appeals. 

Appearance:

Senior Advocate Manoj Mohite, the Special Public Prosecutor along with Advocates Priyanka Chavan and Ilsa Shaikh represented the State.

Advocates Yug Mohit Chaudhry, Gaurav Bhawnani, Anush Shetty and Khan Abdul Wahab appeared for Sajjad.

Advocates Abhishek Yende and Rishikesh Dube represented Pallavi's father. 

Case Title: State of Maharashtra vs Sajjad Ahmed Abdul Aziz Mugal (Criminal Appeal 678 of 2014)

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment