Mumbai: A tribunal in this urban center on Friday pronounced the death sentence upon Parvez Tak for the 2011 homicide of his stepdaughter and artist Laila Khan, along with her parent and four siblings, asserting that the conduct of the perpetrator was “not solely barbaric, but also of the utmost inhumane nature”. It declared that the transgression has undeniably appalled the communal consciousness and hence categorizes under the realm of the “rarest of rare” occurrences, as decreed by the tribunal.

Additional sessions judge Sachin Pawar, on May 9, established Tak’s culpability for the homicide and tampering with evidence, among other charges pursuant to the Indian Penal Code (IPC), with the quantum of his punishment determined on Friday. Laila Khan, her parent Shelina Patel, and her four siblings were slain at their estate in Igatpuri, located in the Nashik district of Maharashtra, in February 2011.

Tak resided with Shelina Patel as a kin member, with the court neither confirming nor denying whether he was wedded to her. The killings surfaced a few months later upon Tak’s arrest by the Jammu and Kashmir police. The decomposed corpses of the victims were subsequently unearthed from the estate.

“The six deceased individuals have fallen prey to a ferocious onslaught by the perpetrator. The homicides were perpetrated in an exceedingly ghastly and repugnant manner. The five female victims were in a state of vulnerability, and the perpetrator exploited this vulnerability,” the tribunal remarked. It expounded that the execution of the deed signifies that these were premeditated murders.

The perpetrator executed the deed “callously” and “strategically obliterated traces of evidence”, which remained undetected for nearly 17 months subsequent to the perpetration of the crime, the tribunal noted. The perpetrator’s revelations during police detention, upon realizing his inability to evade legal repercussions, cannot be construed as contrition or remorse, the decree stated.

The magistrate, within his 250-page judgment, articulated that the perpetrator’s deed, devoid of “justification or provocation”, resulted in the obliteration of the entire household of the deceased Shelina Patel. “The perpetrator’s deed is not solely barbaric but also the epitome of inhumanity. The transgression has undoubtedly shocked the communal conscience. Consequently, I deem the case to fall within the purview of the rarest of rare cases,” the tribunal upheld.

The magistrate opined that considering the “magnitude and enormity of the crime”, its horrifying nature, the perpetrator is liable to endure the utmost penalty for the offense committed by him, as imposition of life imprisonment would be inadequate punishment. “Hence, after meticulous consideration of the entirety of facts and circumstances surrounding the case, and in adherence to legal precepts on sentencing, I arrive at the conclusion that the perpetrator warrants the imposition of the death penalty,” he appended.

According to the prosecution’s case, all the corpses were found interred, with significant fractures detected on each skull. In certain instances, skeletal remains and skull fragments were unearthed separately. It was purported that the perpetrator sought to profit by coercing Shelina’s daughters into engaging in prostitution in Dubai, and upon their refusal to comply with his demands, he eliminated all the victims by perpetrating the alleged offense.

However, the tribunal noted the prosecution’s failure to furnish any corroborative evidence in support of such claims. “There exists absolutely no evidence to substantiate any connection of the perpetrator with Dubai, thereby negating the purported motive as posited by the prosecution,” it remarked. Furthermore, the tribunal contended that the alleged motive fails to be conclusively established in the evidence presented, constituting a weak link against the perpetrator.

Special public prosecutor Ujwal Nikam, who relinquished his post to contest the Lok Sabha election, presided over the trial and examined 41 witnesses. He contended that although direct evidence was lacking, a comprehensive chain of circumstantial evidence existed to link the perpetrator with the case.

The tribunal affirmed that it is firmly established in the prosecution’s evidence that the victims’ corpses were unearthed from the premises of the victims’ estate at Koturwadi in Igatpuri, with the burial site discovered based on disclosures made by the perpetrator.

It was of the opinion that these circumstances collectively constitute a comprehensive chain, unequivocally implicating the perpetrator, leading to the inference that, in all probability, he perpetrated the homicides and concealed the corpses to obfuscate the crime. “Therefore, I find the perpetrator guilty of the offenses under section 302 (murder) and 201 (concealing evidence) of the IPC,” the tribunal concluded.