Earlier this month, accused Kumari Aradhya Jitendra Patil alias Riya (19) and her 16-year-old boyfriend were arrested on charges of killing Bennett Rebello (father) on November 27 at his house at Dwarka Kunj, in Mumbai’s Vakola, with a knife and bamboo stick. The duo had later chopped his body and thrown away different parts in the Mithi river.
As per media reports and police confirmation, the girl had also confessed of NO Sexual assault and that she murdered the man, who had adopted her couple of years ago, only for his property. However, once again by hook or by crook the girl has found a way out to have the least implication on her in the said case.
In a shocking turn of events, Bennett Rebello, the 59-year-old musician who was allegedly killed by his ‘adopted daughter’ and her 16-year-old boyfriend, will be posthumously booked on charges of rape and under sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The minor boyfriend will also be charged for rape under similar sections.
Case:
- Shahji Umap, deputy commissioner of police, said that the girl who claimed to be 19-years-old, turned out to be a minor (17-years, five months old) after her brother submitted her birth certificate to the Mumbai Police’s crime branch on December 15
- The girl, who was in police custody till December 16, was immediately handed over to a juvenile home
- In her statement to police following her arrest alongside that of her 16-year-old boyfriend, the girl said that she was sexually assaulted by Rebello for more than a year
- The girl was staying at Rebello’s Vakola residence since March 2018
- Now, the crime branch will file a complaint against dead Rebello (who naturally cannot defend the charges) and the boyfriend following which a case will be registered at Ghatkopar police station
During their interrogation, the duo revealed the name of a third accused, Ali Miyan Chaus, 19, who helped them pack and dispose the musician’s body. He was arrested on December 14. Chaus is allegedly a school friend of the accused boyfriend and had guided the duo on how to chop and wrap the body.
Our Take:
- Word of the girl, who is a murder accused has been taken as gospel truth by police
- The dead man will never be able to prove whether he was guilty or innocent
- The boyfriend is also a minor, however, thanks to our gender biased laws, he too will be charged of rape under POCSO, because he happened to have consensual sex with a girl, who has now turned out to be a minor
- If Riya had informed police of her age being 19-years, possibly she had confirmed the same age to her boyfriend as well
- And of course, there are no implications on the girl for having physical relations with a minor boy who is younger to her
- Since the case will now be looked at, through the prism of a minor, we sincerely doubt if there will be any stringent action on the murderer girl
- Birth certificates, whether real or fake, have become tools to take advantage of declaring the accused as a minor
- In several rape accused judgements, the arguments have relied upon “If a man is old enough to rape, he is old enough to be tried as an adult”
- Why not apply the same rules for a murderer as well, especially when the girl had clearly confessed of murdering the man for his property
READ DETAILED CASE HISTORY HERE
http://voiceformenindia.com/in-the-news/adopted-daughter-riyachops-fathers-body-into-pieces/
Follow www.mensdayout.com on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram
Join our Facebook Group or follow us on social media by clicking on the icons below
If you find value in our work, you may choose to donate to Voice For Men Foundation via Milaap OR via UPI: voiceformenindia@hdfcbank (80G tax exemption applicable)
Follow Us
Just boycott Indian women if men want to be safe
there are some interesting aspects in this case- What we know so far
1) victim b r was living in with a woman who was pregnant
2) aradhya patil teen murderer was brought by pregnant woman to take care of her and
introduced to victim
3) teen murderer stated that she was raped by her bf and his friends
4) tm states that when she disclosed this event to victim, victim opposed their relationship
and molested her
5) tm states that victim also molested victims live in partner
6) victim was beaten up badly by live in partners friend one month before murder
6) tm continued to live in with victim long after live in partner left victim
7) tm took the help of minor boyfriend to murder victim and dispose of corpse
8) tm was in an adoption agreement with victim perhaps with consent of biological parents
questions to be asked
1) tm pointedly made statement that papa ne kaha ki mere baad mera property sab tera hoga
2) tm claims molestation or rape by victim who she said had also molested the live in partner and “others”
3) tm continued to live with victim even after alleged molestation of earlier live in partner
3)tm took help of teen gang rapist to murder alleged victim molestor.rapist
4)tm statements to police inconsistent and vague about alleged molestation
in the above following thiings possible
– victim actually molested tm and this was a revenge killing
-victim did not molest tm and killing was for property
– motive for both revenge and property
-tm was living on the streets having been kicked out of her own house and had friendship with boys her own age from the same locality
-being on the street it is unlikely that these boy friends would have left her untouched
– to escape this she took refuge with victim by drawing up an adoption agreement
– possible consensual sex by tm and victim and tm and teen bf ( however tm s bf took advantage of situation and called his friends to gang rape her
ulterior motive of tm to grab property as she did not want to wait for victims natural death- she was street smart and possibly knew that as a minor she cannot be prosecuted
-check the date of declaration of adoption by victim of tm, did she state her date of birth and does that make her a minor or major as per declaration
what can be done
– immediate family members of victim to take charge of all his properties to prevent misappropriation by tm or her friends
-slayers rule applies- a murderer cannot benefit from the proceeds of crime so logically tm cannot inherit unless extenuating circumstances