Heirs' DNA Not Collected For Identification Of Remains, Bombay High Court Grants Bail To Man Accused Of Chopping Girlfriend's Body

Justice Amit Borkar observed that the identity of the recovered body parts, which were completely decomposed, needs to be determined during the trial and prima facie, there isn’t sufficient material to warrant further detention of the accused.

“On perusal of the charge-sheet, it appears that no DNA sample collected by the prosecution of Class-I heirs of the deceased. The body parts recovered were completely decomposed. Prima facie it appears that there were no blood stains in the tempo or at a place where alleged crime of cutting body into different parts was committed…Considering totally decomposed body of the deceased, the identification of that needs to be decided during trial. However, prima facie, the material on record against the applicant is not sufficient at this stage to warrant his further detention”, the court held.

According to the prosecution, the case came to light after a missing person complaint was filed, alleging the disappearance of one Rosina Pansare, also known as Kavita Chaudhari, on August 8, 2021. The accused Hanumant Ashok Shinde confessed that he had a love affair with the deceased and they had frequent quarrels due to applicant's refusal to marry her.

The prosecution alleged that on August 12, 2021, around 8:00 PM, Shinde killed the missing woman by throttling her. He then locked the room, arranged tools like scythe, knife, and hexa blade to dismember the body of the deceased on August 15, 2021. He then wrapped the body parts in sacks and sheets and transported it in a borrowed tempo to Pirangut and Lavasa Road.

Shinde was arrested and the prosecution filed chargesheet against him for murder and destruction of evidence under sections 201, 302, 392 (Punishment for robbery), 397, 44, and Section 37(1)(3), 135 of the Maharashtra Police Act, read with Section 4(25)/27 of the Arms Act. He filed the present application seeking bail under Section 439 of the CrPC. His previous bail application had been rejected on April 29, 2020.

The defence submitted that Shinde was arrested after Panchanama under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act for the recovery of body parts was conducted. They contended that the Panchanama was inadmissible as evidence, as section 27 relates to information received from the accused in police custody. Furthermore, the defence raised concerns about the lack of blood stains at the alleged crime scene or in the tempo. They also pointed out the absence of DNA reports to establish that the recovered body parts were indeed of the missing person.

The prosecution, on the other hand, highlighted the evidence of the Panchanama and the recovery of weapons used to cut the body parts, which were found at the location indicated by the applicant. It also emphasized on the brutal nature of the murder.

Upon perusal of the chargesheet, the court noted that no DNA sample had been collected from Class-I heirs of the deceased. The body parts recovered were completely decomposed, making the identification process difficult. The court also said that the admissibility of the Panchanama under Section 27 needed to be determined during the trial.

Considering the circumstances and the lack of sufficient material against Shinde at this stage, the court granted him bail on a personal recognizance bond of Rs. 25,000/- along with one or two sureties in the same amount. Shinde was ordered to attend all court dates and mark his presence before the investigation officer on the first Saturday of each month until the trial concludes.

Advocate Sana Raees Khan along with Advocate Aditya Parmar appeared for the accused.

APP Amit A. Palkar appeared for the State.

Case no. – Bail Application No. 1883 of 2023

Case Title – Hanumant Ashok Shinde v. State of Maharashtra