Hang Him, He’s Dead to Me: Kin of Accused in Hyd Rape-Murder Case
“I have disowned my son... I will not go to court when the trial starts. He is dead to me,” said one family.
Among those furious over the vile plot hatched to gang-rape and subsequently murder the Hyderabad veterinary doctor, are family members of three of the four accused who have been arrested in the case.
The three include, Accused 2 Jollu Shiva, Accused 3 Jollu Naveen and Accused 4 Chinakunta Chennakashavulu.
On the intervening night of 27 and 28 November, a government-employed veterinary doctor in Hyderabad was gang-raped and murdered before being set on fire. The four accused were arrested on 29 November.
Fuming over their sons’ involvement in such a horrific crime, their families spoke to The Quint about coming to terms with the shock.
What Was the Role of Accused 2 in The Murder?
Jollu Shiva is a cleaner who worked alongside the others. He was the one who was asked to take Poornima's* two-wheeler for repairing the puncture. It may be recalled that the tyre was punctured by the four accused to lay a trap for the victim.
According to the police, Jollu also raped Poornima in the compound. He then went and bought the petrol from a petrol bunk and also set her dead body on fire at Shadnagar road.
'I Have Disowned My Son’
Jollu Rajappa, Jollu Shiva's father, was taken by the police to sign some documents after the accused were arrested on 29 November. Recalling the 24 hours he spent at the jail, he said, "I felt humiliated as the policemen went on taunting us. They asked us why we let our child go down the wrong path, that we should have instilled fear in him, that we should have put him in a different line of work. They kept asking us why we let our child go astray. I did not say anything. Just looked down and listened. What can I say? Is this why we wanted a son?"
Rajappa, with his arms folded and his back straight, seemed like a man whose pride was hurt. The family says it has faced humiliation ever since the news came out.
“I don’t want anything to do with my son. I have disowned him... I will not go to court when the trial starts either. He is dead to me.”
Shiva's sister who returned home after the arrest, looked straight with eyes wide open and said to The Quint, "Kill him. What else should they do? After what he has done, what else does he deserve? Kill him."
What Was the Role of Accused 3 in The Murder?
Jollu Naveen was the one who removed the air from the tyre of Poornima, when she had parked it to go to her clinic in Hyderabad's Gachibowli. He along with two others had dragged her to the compound nearby and while everyone took turns to rape her, according to the police Naveen raped her too.
Naveen then accompanied Shiva to buy petrol and set her body on fire.
'He Has to Face Consequences of His Actions'
When Jollu Shiva’s father Rajappa went to the police station, he also represented Accused 3, Jollu Naveen, his sister's son.
The reason why Rajappa went and not Naveen's father, is because Naveen’s father passed away 12 years ago after battling cancer. His mother, Laxmi, takes care of the family.
Recalling how Naveen behaved after returning on 28 November, Laxmi says, "He didn't show any signs of remorse, guilt or anything. He was absolutely alright. He didn't say anything to me about what transpired the previous night. He ate, did things as he normally does, and went off to sleep."
Naveen worked as a lorry cleaner till six months ago, but that night, as his friends insisted they needed help for a delivery, he went out. "He used to make Rs 2,000 - Rs 3,000 every month. Nothing more. When he left, I was wondering why he would go out again after leaving the job six months ago."
When asked about the nature of the crime, the mother was far from defending her son. "Of course I am angry with him. How dare he do something like this? How dare he even think of something like this? I am in disbelief that my son could be this person but I am so much more angry. He should be punished," she said, without betraying much emotion.
What Was the Role of Accused 4 in The Murder?
While Shiva and Naveen were unmarried, Chinakunta Chennakeshavulu got married six months ago. He is Accused-4.
Not only was he amongst those who dragged Poornima to the compound and raped her, but he dumped the body into the lorry and was present when the body was burnt.
‘I Feel Horrible, But He Needs to Be Strictly Punished'
His mother, Jayamma claims that Chennakeshavulu did not work because he had kidney problems. Showing some files of his with his reports, she says he could not do much work.
"He made a mistake, he must be strictly punished," his mother says looking distraught. Adding that he came home that night and slept, but never told anyone in the family, including his wife about what had happened.
Reiterating what all the others said, Jayamma says, "There is no one who can understand the pain of a child being taken away from her mother. I am in pain and I do not understand why and how he could do this, however he must be strictly punished," she says as her eyes well up with tears.
Who Is Accused 1?
While the family of the aforementioned three accused believe their sons should be punished, the family of Mohammad did not say so.
What’s more, unlike Shiva, Naveen and Chennakeshavulu, Mohammad was the only one who told his parents that he had killed a woman when he got home a day later.
His mother said, “My son, Mohammad, came home on the morning of 29 November, around 1 in the morning. He looked petrified and kept telling us he killed someone. He said, ‘I was taking my lorry from one side and on the opposite side, a bike was coming with a woman sitting on it. I hit her and I killed her’.”
To read about his story, click here.
The punishment for murder, under Section 302 of the IPC, is death or imprisonment for life and a fine. The punishment for gang rape, under Section 376D of the IPC, is rigorous imprisonment for 20 years to imprisonment for life along with a fine to be paid to the victim.
Other offences the four have been charged with are Section 120(B) (criminal conspiracy), 366 (kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage), 506 (criminal intimidation), 201 (causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender) r/w 34 (common intention) and 392 (robbery) of the IPC.
Subscribe To Our Daily Newsletter And Get News Delivered Straight To Your Inbox.