Rajkot: A 60-year-old woman sentenced to life term for killing the seven-year-old son of a neighbour walked free on Monday after she was acquitted by the same court in Dhoraji town of Rajkot district, which had convicted her in June 2025.The woman, Aruna alias Anita Devmurari, was arrested from Vadodara 30 years after the alleged crime, and five days after being sentenced following an ex parte trial on June 12 last year.Additional sessions judge A M Shaikh, on March 9, acquitted Aruna, granting her the benefit of the doubt and citing glaring investigative lapses, hostile witnesses and lack of direct evidence.Aruna, who was arrested in 1996, remained untraceable since 1998 after she was granted bail. The court issued arrest warrants several times, but the police failed to produce her before the court for trial.Soon after the conviction, police arrested Devmurari from Vadodara. She then moved the Gujarat High Court, arguing that she never got an opportunity to defend herself.In Sept last year, the High Court ordered the Dhoraji sessions court to conduct a fresh trial within six months, observing that the trial court adopted a shortcut to dispose of an old case.“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,” the high court noted.During the retrial, the lower court noted that the prosecution relied entirely on circumstantial evidence as there were no eyewitnesses to the murder. Their neighbour Kanji Koyani, who allegedly saw Aruna disposing of the suitcase, died. Without his testimony, his earlier statements were treated as inadmissible hearsay.The prosecution’s case weakened further when Aruna’s husband Rajesh, a key witness, turned hostile during the trial and said he did not remember the events, and his statement to the police at that time became inadmissible.The court also noted that when a retrial is ordered, testimonies recorded earlier become invalid if they were not recorded in the presence of the accused or her lawyer. As a result, Rajesh’s earlier statement was discarded.The court further pointed out that under Section 122 of the Indian Evidence Act, private marital communications cannot be used as evidence against a spouse.THE 1996 MURDEROn Aug 5, 1996, a quarrel broke out between Aruna and Rajesh’s son and the son of their neighbour Girdhar Kothiya. According to the prosecution, Aruna called Kothiya’s son to her house, throttled him and fatally struck him on the head with a pestle. She is accused of placing the body in a suitcase. When Rajesh returned in the evening, he noticed a foul smell and asked about it. Aruna initially denied knowing anything, but later allegedly confessed to him. She asked him to bring incense sticks to mask the odour. Rajesh, fearing legal consequences, left for Aruna’s parents’ house in Jetpur. Prosecution stated that she later dumped the suitcase behind the house. During the search, neighbour Kanji Koyani claimed he saw Aruna placing something behind the house and noticed dogs barking there. On checking, he found the boy’s body inside a suitcase and informed the family. Police arrested Aruna soon, but she was granted bail by the high court in Dec 1998.
