On the intervening night of 24 and 25 October, 2014, Kuldeep Yadav was accused of killing Sonwati by repeatedly stabbing her and then slitting her throat in the Sangam Vihar neighbourhood of south Delhi.
The offender was also accused by the police of stealing the victim of her gold jewels.
The deceased was brutally slain with a sharp-edged instrument, according to the postmortem report, and the corpse of the victim had more than 32 incised wounds.
Yadav was found guilty by Additional Sessions Judge Vrinda Kumari, who noted that the prosecution had established beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused had robbed the deceased’s home and intentionally hurt Sonwati with a sharp object while doing so. Sonwati later died as a result of her injuries. As a result, the accused is convicted.
The offender was ordered by the court to submit an affidavit detailing his income, and a hearing date of 23 September has been set. After the affidavit is submitted, the sentence’s defence will be heard.
According to the court’s ruling from 13 September, the accused knew that complainant Karamveer’s grandmother was home alone at the time, therefore he planned to call the complainant first before committing the crime.
The fact that the worn, blood-stained garments of the accused and the stolen jewellery of the dead were found in his home not long after the deceased was killed is not a coincidence, the court said.
The court further stated that the accused was unable to explain why human blood was found on his clothing or why the slain woman’s jewellery was found in his home.
The accused’s inability to explain his exclusive knowledge of his whereabouts at the time of the murder, as well as his flimsy claims that the victim’s stolen jewellery was placed on him, did not help his case, according to the court.
The court said that the circumstances are all close to the time and setting of the occurrence in issue and that the prosecution had reasonably proved all of the links in the chain of events that point to the accused’s guilt.
The prosecution has solidly established a series of events that indicate to the accused’s guilt, and the court further stated that these events rule out any alternative possibilities.
Based on the complainant’s allegation, the Sangam Vihar police station filed a FIR against the accused under many IPC provisions, including murder, robbery, or dacoity with an attempt to inflict death or grave harm and voluntarily causing harm in the course of committing robbery.
(With inputs from PTI)