NEW DELHI: A man has been awarded rigorous life imprisonment by a Delhi court for raping and murdering a 60-year-old lady whom he used to call his mother.
"In the present case, the convict committed forceful sexual intercourse upon a lady older than his age whom he used to call his mother. During that process, he also murdered her," Additional Sessions Judge Madhu Jain said.
The court also imposed a fine of Rs 10,000 on Achey Lal who was held guilty of raping the woman under the influence of liquor, resulting in her death.According to the prosecution, the woman was working as a housemaid in the nearby houses in Majnu Ka Tila locality in north-Delhi.She was found dead in her house in December last year and one empty bottle of whisky was found near the body.
Besides this, other articles and utensils of the house were found in scattered condition and one mobile phone was also lying at the side of the body, the prosecution said.One of the prosecution witness, who had first seen the body and informed the police, told the court that Achey Lal, who worked with a tent house as contractor, was under the influence of liquor and was standing outside the gate of the room.
He was not allowing anyone to enter the room saying the victim was like her mother and was not dead but was sleeping after consuming liquor, the witness said.
Kishan Lal, husband of the deceased, said that on theday of the incident, Achey Lal came to his house with two more persons and they consumed liquor.
After consuming liquor, he, along with two others left the house, whereas Achey Lal remained in his house along with his wife and later he came to know that his wife has expired, he said.
The accused, however, said that he was not present at the spot and was falsely implicated by the police.
Regarding the recovery of a mobile phone of his wife from the spot, he said it was snatched by the police from him and later the same was planted at the spot.
The defence counsel argued the chain of circumstantial evidence was not complete and there was no last seen evidence and even the motive of the crime was not established by the prosecution.
The court, however, rejected the contentions of the defence counsel saying "in the case in hand also, the chain of all circumstantial evidence is complete, there is no gap left in the chain of circumstantial evidence and the cumulative effect of circumstances proved on record by the prosecution points out towards the guilt of accused only."