Woman Acquitted After 30 Years in Landmark Rajkot Murder Case Retrial
In a dramatic legal reversal, a 60-year-old woman, Aruna alias Anita Devmurari, has been acquitted by a sessions court in Dhoraji, Rajkot district, after being sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of a seven-year-old boy. The acquittal came on Monday, following a retrial ordered by the Gujarat High Court, which highlighted significant procedural flaws in the original trial.
Background of the Case
The case dates back to August 5, 1996, when a quarrel erupted between Aruna's son and the son of their neighbor, Girdhar Kothiya. According to the prosecution, Aruna called Kothiya's son to her house, where she allegedly throttled him and struck him fatally on the head with a pestle. She is accused of placing the body in a suitcase and later dumping it behind her house. The body was discovered after a neighbor, Kanji Koyani, reported seeing Aruna disposing of something and noticing dogs barking in the area.
Initial Conviction and Arrest
Aruna was arrested soon after the incident in 1996 but was granted bail by the High Court in December 1998. She remained untraceable thereafter, with the police failing to produce her for trial despite multiple arrest warrants. In June 2025, she was convicted in an ex parte trial and sentenced to life imprisonment. Shortly after this conviction, police arrested her from Vadodara, 30 years after the alleged crime.
High Court Intervention and Retrial
Aruna appealed to the Gujarat High Court, arguing that she never had an opportunity to defend herself. In September last year, the High Court ordered a fresh trial within six months, criticizing the lower court for adopting shortcuts to dispose of the old case. The court noted, "In our opinion, the trial court, with a view to disposing of old matters, adopted a shortcut and hurriedly concluded the trial without following the proper procedure of a sessions trial."
Key Factors in the Acquittal
During the retrial, Additional Sessions Judge A. M. Shaikh acquitted Aruna on March 9, citing several critical issues:
- Investigative Lapses: The prosecution relied entirely on circumstantial evidence, with no eyewitnesses to the murder.
- Hostile Witnesses: Aruna's husband, Rajesh, a key witness, turned hostile during the trial, stating he did not remember the events, rendering his earlier police statement inadmissible.
- Inadmissible Evidence: Under Section 122 of the Indian Evidence Act, private marital communications cannot be used against a spouse, further weakening the case.
- Loss of Testimony: Neighbor Kanji Koyani, who allegedly saw Aruna disposing of the suitcase, died before the retrial, making his earlier statements hearsay and inadmissible.
The court emphasized that when a retrial is ordered, earlier testimonies become invalid if not recorded in the presence of the accused or her lawyer, leading to the discarding of key evidence.
Implications and Conclusion
This case underscores the importance of rigorous legal procedures and the challenges in prosecuting old crimes with limited evidence. Aruna's acquittal after three decades highlights the judicial system's capacity for correction, but also raises questions about investigative efficiency and witness reliability in long-pending cases.
