RENUKA BAI ALIAS RINKU ALIAS RATAN Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
LAWS(SC)-2006-8-89
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: BOMBAY)
Decided on August 31,2006

RENUKA BAI ALIAS RINKU ALIAS RATAN Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. KOUSHAL PRASAD JAISWAL [LAWS(MPH)-2008-7-28] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. SANGITA GULAB CHAURE [LAWS(BOM)-2007-7-177] [REFERRED TO]
DEEPTI ANIL DEVASTHALI VS. STATE OF MAHARASTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2009-9-152] [REFERRED TO]
VIJAY VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2010-1-31] [REFERRED TO]
EGAIARASAN alias THIAGARAJAN alias KUZHANDAI VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2007-9-419] [REFERRED TO]
VIJAY TULSHIRAM MASKARE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2010-1-189] [REFERRED TO]
ALOKE NATH DUTTA VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(SC)-2006-12-81] [REFERRED TO]
SWAMY SHRADDANANDA ALIAS MURALI MANOHAR MISHRA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(SC)-2007-5-162] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. SAYEED MOHD HANIF ABDUL RAHIM [LAWS(BOM)-2012-2-143] [REFERRED TO]
STATE VS. RYAN FERNANDES S/O. PAUL FERNANDES [LAWS(BOM)-2012-12-35] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. SUKA PALEI [LAWS(ORI)-2012-10-25] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA KUMAR KEDIA SON OF LATE CHAJU RAM KEDIA VS. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH C B I PATNA [LAWS(PAT)-2018-4-13] [REFERRED TO]
NIDHI VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2018-3-196] [REFERRED TO]
SUSHIL KUMAR AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2019-1-27] [REFERRED TO]
KARAMBIR SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2013-12-55] [REFERRED TO]
MAJOR SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2012-1-102] [REFERRED TO]
BABUBHAI BHURABHAI JESADIA VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2020-6-1004] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

K. G. Balakrishnan, J. - (1.)This criminal appeal has been filed by the two appellants herein who have been found guilty by the High Court of Bombay for various offences. These appellants were charged for various crimes alleged to have been committed by them during the period June 1990 to October 1996. They were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kolahpur and found guilty and sentenced to death. The High Court confirmed their conviction on various counts and the sentence imposed on them.
(2.)The appellants Renuka Bai @ Rinku @ Ratan and Seema @ Devki @ Devli are sisters. Their mother, Anjanabai, a co-ac-cused died in 1997 and hence she could not be tried. Approver Kiran Shinde who had studied upto 7th standard and left the school in 1982, belonged to Pune. He obtained some training in the work of tailoring and was doing tailoring work in a shop belonging to one Suresh. In 1983 he came in contact with the first appellant Renuka Bai and in December 1989 he married Renuka at a temple near Shirdi. Renuka was previously married to somebody else and was having a child by name Aashish. These two appellants and their mother Anjanabai and the approver Kiran Shinde and child Aashish were residing as tenants in a house at Gonthalinagar in Pune. The appellants and their mother used to commit thefts. For that they would go to the places of festivals and whenever they got opportunity they used to snatch the gold chains and made a living out of the income derived from such thefts committed by them.
(3.)In 1990, the first appellant Renuka Bai along with her child Aashish went to a temple. There was a large gathering at the temple, Renuka Bai tried to snatch a purse from a person but she was caught in that process. On being caught, she raised a hue and cry and questioned the person as to why he had caught hold of her hand when she was having a child with her and could not have been involved in a crime. Many people gathered around her and seeing the mother and the child, they left the appellant Renuka Bai. She narrated this incident to her sister Seema and mother Anjanabai and told how she had managed to escape as she had the child with her. The police had caught both the appellants and their mother on several occasions and they used to bribe the police and escape from the clutches of law. The appellants and their mother decided that thereafter they would have a child with them at the time of committing the crime so that by making use of the child they can escape from the crowd. According to the prosecution, the appellants, their mother Anjanabai and approver Kiran Shinde entered into a conspiracy to kidnap small children below five years of age and make use of them whenever necessary and dispose them of when they are no longer useful. They thought that this was the only way to evade possible arrest whenever they were caught in the process of committing theft.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.