Lawyer, held guilty of abducting doctor & acquitted of murder, released on remission after 19 years in Yerawada jail
Pune: Leena Deosthale (65), who was serving a life sentence for the abduction of orthopaedic surgeon Dr Deepak Mahajan after being acquitted of murder, has walked out on remission after spending 19 years in Yerawada Central Prison.
Deosthale's daughter, Deepti, who is undergoing life imprisonment in the case, has also applied for remission. Her plea is pending before a five-member Sentence Review Board of state govt for consideration.
Leena, then a lawyer, and Deepti, a cookery expert and writer, are from Dahisar in Mumbai. According to police, they allegedly kidnapped and murdered 47-year-old Mahajan by forcibly giving him an overdose of sedatives after a foiled bid for a Rs25-lakh ransom in July 2006.
Pune police arrested them on July 7, 2006, and later filed a chargesheet.
On Dec 27, 2007, a fast-track court in Pune sentenced the mother-daughter duo to death. Bombay high court in 2009 acquitted them of murder for lack of evidence but convicted them for the doctor's abduction and ransom, and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
Leena applied for remission through the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Pune, because she spent 19 years in actual imprisonment and 26 years with remission since her arrest on July 7, 2006.
The state prisons department opposed her plea on grounds of her complicity in a serious crime, and that her appeal against conviction was pending for hearing before the Supreme Court.
DLSA's pro-bono lawyer Sachin Salunkhe, who represented Leena before the Sentence Review Board, said that under the guidance of DLSA secretary Sonal Patil, they meticulously reviewed the case, highlighting her incarceration, her remorse, her old age, and her potential for rehabilitation.
Their efforts, rooted in the principle 'hate the sin, not the sinner' emphasised restorative justice and the possibility of reintegration into society.
The Supreme Court, in its order of Sept 15, 2022, said that the cases of convicts spending 14 years in jail could be referred to govt for considering their premature release in a fixed time, irrespective of whether the appeal is pending or not, Salunkhe said.
"The state govt resolution of 2006 states that a woman convict is eligible for remission if she has completed 60 years, undergone 14 years of rigorous imprisonment, and if she is physically weak.
Another govt resolution of 2008 states that in cases relating to abduction with ransom under section 364 (a) of the Indian Penal Code, if a convict, irrespective of gender, has spent 10 years in jail with remission, totalling 16 years, is entitled to claim remission," he said.
The board, after considering the apex court ruling and govt resolutions, on May 16 issued an order granting remission to Leena. She was released from jail on May 23, Salunkhe said.
"Her release marks a milestone in the ongoing discourse on criminal justice reform, rehabilitation, and the balance between punishment and mercy." The prisons department also opposed Leena's remission on grounds that she had not deposited a fine of Rs59,000 as per the trial court's order.
Salunkhe deposited the fine amount on her behalf to secure her release on remission.
Pune: Leena Deosthale (65), who was serving a life sentence for the abduction of orthopaedic surgeon Dr Deepak Mahajan after being acquitted of murder, has walked out on remission after spending 19 years in Yerawada Central Prison.
Deosthale's daughter, Deepti, who is undergoing life imprisonment in the case, has also applied for remission. Her plea is pending before a five-member Sentence Review Board of state govt for consideration.
Leena, then a lawyer, and Deepti, a cookery expert and writer, are from Dahisar in Mumbai. According to police, they allegedly kidnapped and murdered 47-year-old Mahajan by forcibly giving him an overdose of sedatives after a foiled bid for a Rs25-lakh ransom in July 2006.
Pune police arrested them on July 7, 2006, and later filed a chargesheet.
On Dec 27, 2007, a fast-track court in Pune sentenced the mother-daughter duo to death. Bombay high court in 2009 acquitted them of murder for lack of evidence but convicted them for the doctor's abduction and ransom, and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
Leena applied for remission through the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Pune, because she spent 19 years in actual imprisonment and 26 years with remission since her arrest on July 7, 2006.
The state prisons department opposed her plea on grounds of her complicity in a serious crime, and that her appeal against conviction was pending for hearing before the Supreme Court.
DLSA's pro-bono lawyer Sachin Salunkhe, who represented Leena before the Sentence Review Board, said that under the guidance of DLSA secretary Sonal Patil, they meticulously reviewed the case, highlighting her incarceration, her remorse, her old age, and her potential for rehabilitation.
Their efforts, rooted in the principle 'hate the sin, not the sinner' emphasised restorative justice and the possibility of reintegration into society.
The Supreme Court, in its order of Sept 15, 2022, said that the cases of convicts spending 14 years in jail could be referred to govt for considering their premature release in a fixed time, irrespective of whether the appeal is pending or not, Salunkhe said.
"The state govt resolution of 2006 states that a woman convict is eligible for remission if she has completed 60 years, undergone 14 years of rigorous imprisonment, and if she is physically weak.
Another govt resolution of 2008 states that in cases relating to abduction with ransom under section 364 (a) of the Indian Penal Code, if a convict, irrespective of gender, has spent 10 years in jail with remission, totalling 16 years, is entitled to claim remission," he said.
The board, after considering the apex court ruling and govt resolutions, on May 16 issued an order granting remission to Leena. She was released from jail on May 23, Salunkhe said. "Her release marks a milestone in the ongoing discourse on criminal justice reform, rehabilitation, and the balance between punishment and mercy." The prisons department also opposed Leena's remission on grounds that she had not deposited a fine of Rs59,000 as per the trial court's order.
Salunkhe deposited the fine amount on her behalf to secure her release on remission.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Iran executes man convicted of spying for Israel amid ongoing conflict: Reports
Iran executed a man on Sunday convicted of working with Israel's Mossad intelligence agency, as per Iranian Tasnim news agency. The executed individual, Majid Mosayebi, was accused of attempting to pass on 'sensitive information' to Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service. AFP cited the Iranian judiciary's Mizan Online news platform, reporting that Mosayebi was hanged after completing all legal proceedings, including a final ruling by Iran's Supreme Court. The judiciary said: 'Majid Mosayebi… was hanged this morning after going through the full process of criminal procedure and after his sentence was confirmed by the Supreme Court.' The details of Mosayebi's arrest, including when he was taken into custody, have not been disclosed. Since June 13—the date Israel launched its campaign targeting Iranian nuclear and military infrastructure—authorities in Iran have announced a flurry of arrests allegedly linked to Israeli intelligence operations. On Saturday, police in Iran's Qom province said they had arrested 22 individuals with suspected ties to Israeli spy networks, reported AFP. The semi-official Fars news agency quoted a police intelligence official as saying: 'Twenty-two people were identified and arrested on charges of being linked to the Zionist regime's spy services, disturbing public opinion, and supporting the criminal regime.' Further arrests were made Sunday in Kermanshah, a western province of Iran. Judiciary spokesperson Asghar Jahangir confirmed that three individuals were detained for alleged espionage. Notably, one of the detainees is believed to hold citizenship from a European country. Jahangir said, as quoted by Mizan: 'These arrests were made possible thanks to the rapid presence of the population and their assistance to the intelligence services, law enforcement agencies, and judicial officers.' In response to the growing number of espionage-related cases, Jahangir also announced that special judicial branches would be set up within provincial prosecutors' offices and courts to handle such cases under 'extraordinary' procedures. Iran frequently announces arrests of individuals it claims are spies working for Israel or other foreign powers, reported AFP, although it rarely provides supporting evidence. The country has executed numerous individuals over the years for alleged collaboration with Mossad. According to human rights organisations such as Amnesty International, Iran is the world's second-highest executor of capital punishment after China. (With inputs from Reuters, AFP)
Time of India
5 hours ago
- Time of India
Unlawful adoption: Telangana HC rejects couple's plea for custody of 'purchased' baby; after police bust baby trafficking racket
HYDERABAD: The Telangana high court recently dismissed a petition filed by a couple seeking custody of a male infant they purchased from the infant's biological mother through an agent. The baby was rescued by police at Chaitanyapuri when they busted an interstate baby trafficking racket. Along with the infant's adoptive parents, the infant's biological mother also sought custody. However, the court noted that the child's adoption did not occur through the proper adoption guidelines. Rachakonda police, in March 2025, busted a child trafficking racket, rescuing 16 infants and arresting around 15 persons. The accused included the kingpin of the racket, K Krishnaveni, a 'supplier' from Gujarat named Vandana, their associates, and adoptive couples. The petition seeking the child's custody was filed by a Jeedimetla resident couple as well as the child's biological mother. Biological mom, adoptive couple were family friends Their counsel alleged that since the child's biological mother and the adoptive couple were family friends, they gave the child in adoption, a process approved by the Supreme Court in a similar case. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch CFD với công nghệ và tốc độ tốt hơn IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo Arguing that the child should not be deprived of parental care, they sought the child's custody. In response, the govt pleader opposed the petition, arguing that the couple had paid a large sum of money to the biological mother in exchange for the baby, and submitted to the court the couple's confession statement recorded at the time of their arrest. The confession statement clearly mentions how the couple were childless for over a decade since their marriage. The counsel also informed the court that after the child's rescue, his biological mother went absconding and did not respond to notices from the Child Welfare Committee (CWC). After hearing both sides, the high court noted that this cannot be a case of illegal detention of the child and observed that the couple did not follow the adoption rules according to the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA) and the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection) Act. No legal standing established, says court The court also observed that the petitioners failed to establish their legal standing (locus) or provide consistent and truthful facts about the adoption and the biological mother. Furthermore, the adoption deed is unregistered and does not comply with legal requirements. The cited Supreme Court decision is also factually different and is not applicable to this case, the high court ruled. Maintaining that the child currently being in the custody of the Child Welfare Committee was safer and more legal, the court dismissed their petition.
Hindustan Times
8 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
6 years, no closure in child rape PIL: SC revives key issue it wrapped up days earlier
The Supreme Court last month disposed of a suo motu public interest petition it had initiated in 2019 to address the alarming rise in child rape cases across the country -- only for another bench to revive a key unresolved aspect of the same matter barely a week later, providing a telling commentary on institutional memory and follow-through. When it resurfaced in March 2021 under a new bench, the compensation issue, which was once central to the court's intervention, never came up again. (HT Photo) The petition, registered as 'In Re: Alarming Rise in the Number of Reported Child Rape Incidents', was formally closed on May 15 by a bench led by Justice Bela M Trivedi, as one of her last orders before retiring. Justice Trivedi retired on June 9 but her last working day was May 16, owing to an overseas trip But on May 23, another bench led by Justice BV Nagarathna admitted a new writ petition that brought back to centre stage a long-forgotten issue in the same case -- the framing and implementation of a dedicated compensation, rehabilitation, welfare and education scheme for Pocso (protection of children from sexual offences) victims. The near-immediate revival of the compensation issue, which was left unattended despite explicit directions by the top court five years ago, lays bare a systemic lapse -- a PIL that lasted six years was wrapped up without taking one of its most vital components to its logical conclusion. The 2019 suo motu proceedings were triggered by intense public concern and media reporting on rising incidents of sexual violence against children. On July 12, 2019, the Supreme Court took cognisance and registered the case to formulate urgent judicial directions. By July 25, the court had appointed senior advocate V Giri as amicus curiae and directed the creation of exclusive Pocso courts across India to address delays in trials. Giri was assisted by advocate Uttar Babbar (now designated as a senior counsel). On December 16, 2019, noting an 'extremely high' pendency of Pocso cases in some states, the court issued state-specific directions. The bench, then headed by Justice Deepak Gupta, also expressed its intention to formulate a national compensation scheme for Pocso victims -- a task deemed necessary for their psychological and financial recovery. In March 2020, the court went a step further and summoned a joint secretary from the Ministry of Women and Child Development to assist in designing the scheme. 'On the next date of hearing, we shall consider the issue of framing a national scheme for payment of compensation to victims of offences under the Pocso Act,' the order read. But that next date took more than a year to arrive. Following Justice Gupta's retirement in May 2020, the matter fell into procedural limbo. When it resurfaced in March 2021 under a new bench, the compensation issue, which was once central to the court's intervention, never came up again. Over 15 hearings took place between March 2021 and May 2025, but not one order addressed the proposed scheme. Instead, the focus narrowed to timelines for investigation and trial under the Pocso Act. By the time Justice Trivedi's bench finally decided to close the matter on May 15, 2025, the compensation issue had effectively vanished from judicial radar. 'Since the timelines have been stipulated under the Pocso Act... the same must be adhered to as far as possible,' the May 15 order recorded, urging Union and state governments to create more exclusive Pocso courts and sensitise investigating officials. 'Subject to the above, the suo moto proceedings are hereby closed.' On May 23, just eight days after the disposal, the Supreme Court admitted a fresh writ petition filed by Just Rights for Children Alliance, that pointedly noted the unfinished business of the 2019 case. Senior counsel Pragyan Pradip Sharma, appearing for the petitioners, submitted that while the Registry of the Supreme Court had indeed drafted a 'Scheme for Compensation, Rehabilitation, Welfare and Education of POCSO Victims, 2019' pursuant to earlier orders, the scheme was neither discussed nor adopted by the Union government or the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA). The new petition now seeks a writ of mandamus directing the Union government and NALSA to formally notify and implement a compensation framework tailored to the needs of child victims of sexual abuse. It also seeks immediate disbursement of compensation to individual victims already identified, as well as uniform implementation of the existing NALSA 2018 scheme in the interim. Justice Nagarathna's bench has issued notice to the Union of India, NALSA and the Ministry of Women and Child Development, with the case now slated for further hearing on August 18, 2025. The swift succession of the two orders, one closing the book and the other reopening a forgotten chapter, highlights the ironies and inefficiencies that can sometimes plague long-drawn PILs in the Supreme Court. Simultaneously, the revival of the issue by a new bench not only re-emphasises its importance but also underscores the need for institutional continuity in PIL monitoring, especially in cases driven by the court's own conscience (suo motu).
