Get help now

Jyoti Dasani Murder Case Legal Report



  • Pages 16
  • Words 3856
  • Views 414
  • Can’t find relevant credible information

    Let our experts help you

    Get help now

    It is indeed a great opportunity for me to learn and gain more knowledge on law. would also like to thank my mentor Advocate Shikhar Dixit sir, my parents and my friends for their support. Thank You, THE ABSTRACT The case revolves around three people. Jyoti Dasani, Piyush Dasani and Manisha Makhija. Jyoti Dasani who was the victim in the case was the daughter of a renowed industrialist of Jabalpur, Shankar Nagdeo and the wife of the main conspirator of the case, Piyush Dasani. Piyush is the son ofa billionaire biscuit baron, 0m Prakash Dasani. The third person involved in the case was Mahisha Makhija.

    Manisha is the daughter of a pan masala baron, the neighbour of the Dasani’s and the woman who was having an affair with Piyush Dasani. She was also named as one of the primary conspirators of the case. Piyush Dasani allegedly got his wife Jyoti Dasani murdered. Piyush was having an extramarital affair with Manisha. Jyoti became aware of this fact. Piyush, therefore planned the murder of his own wife to get rid of her, fearing she might tell her influential parents about her husband’s affair during their visit to their city on the festival of Raksha Bandhan.

    This happened during the late July of 2014. Piyush took Jyoti out for dinner and during their return, he executed his plan with the help of his friends- Renu, Sonu, Ashish and Awadhesh, the driver of Manisha. He himself got Jyoti kidnapped and later, after finding a safe spot, the kidnappers i. e his friends stabbed her on the back a couple of times and made her bleed to death. This was the overview of the Jyoti Dasani Murder Case. Jyoti Dasani murder case. This is a case about a young lady who had to die for no good cause.

    She paid the price for being oblivious of her husband’s real intentions and for being unaware of the fact that her husband can actually go o the extent of killing her for marrying his paramour. The lady’s name is Jyoti Dasani. Jyoti, a 27 year old woman and the daughter of a renowed Industrialist of Jabalpur, Mr. Shankar Nagdeo. Mr. Shankar Nagdeo is also the vice president of the Mahakaushal Chamber of Commerce and Industry, a vast corporation. She got married just 1 6 months back and seems like that was all until it could last. She was married to the son of Mr. m Prakash Shyam Dasani who is a billionaire biscuit baron and has the franchise for the Parle G biscuits in Uttar Pradesh, India. The 29 year old man who was Jyoti’s husband is Piyush Dasani. Both Jyoti and Piyush came from a well-to-do family and lived together in Pandu Nagar in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh. CASE HISTORY Piyush, the mastermind behind the case allegedly got his wife Jyoti Dasani killed with the help of his friends – Ashish, Sonu, Renu and Awadhesh. Awadhesh was the driver of his paramour, Manisha. He executed his plan on the night of 27th July in Kanpur.

    The murder was being planned for atleast 2 months as the Police said and Piyush himself was found to be the culprit. It was the night of 27th July in Kanpur. Somewhere between 10 and 11 pm Piyush took Jyoti out for dinner at Verandah’ Restraunt in Swaroop Nagar. As per the words of Mr. Ashutosh Pandey, IG (Kanpur Zone), the CCTV footage which they saw of that Restraunt of the night of the murder, both Piyush and Jyoti were not talking much to each other. Considering the fact that they were actually out for dinner, they were not eating much too. Piyush behaved in a stange eerie manner. He looked tense and his actions made it clear that night.

    He Ordered a Kiwi flavoured hukka with a Red Bull that night, which the restraunt staff said was a pretty bizarre combination. After every 15 minutes, he was going out of the restraunt to attend and to make phone calls. He not ust went out of the Restraunt, he walked down three stories, crossed the road and went far ahead just to talk on the phone when in such a case even using the rest room would have sufficed. After talking once, he again returned back upstairs and repeated the same thing for using his cell phone. He was constantly and alternatively talking to Awadhesh first and then to Manisha that night.

    He even tried to duck the CCTV in the restraunt for a couple number of times. Most of this imformation was obtained from a youtube video of an Interview of the IG (Kanpur Zone), Mr. Ashutosh Pandey with a crime reporter. After their so-called dinner, Piyush told Jyoti that he had planned a long drive with her. Jyoti proceeded towards the long drive with her husband totally unaware of the fact that the murderers were on the way waiting for their car to arrive. As soon as the car came, the murderers intercepted their car, took Piyush’s car over with Jyoti in it and fled to a safe spot to execute Piyush’s hideous plan.

    Piyush escaped from there but was on the phone all the time and was hearingJyoti’s shrieks just to make sure that the murder he planned took off well. Awadhesh, the driver stopped the car between CS Azad University and Rawatpur Stretch. They stabbed Jyoti about 14 to 17 times on her back and abandoned the car well parked in the Panki Area, leaving her in it to die. The same night i. e. on 27th July 2014, After leaving his wife at the murderer’s disposal, Piyush went straight to his place. He changed his outfit, deleted all call logs and messages and after about 1 and a half hour, he walked to the nearby police station.

    He lodged the F. I. R. Of the kidnapping-cum-murder of his wife Jyoti. He told the Police that his wife lyoti had been whisked away in their car by a group of men while they were on their way home to Pandu Nagar after having dinner. He said that the kidnappers just sort of took the car from him and ran away with his wife and gave the impression that he couldn’t do anything about it at the moment. After Piyush left, the police made certain investigations. The next day i. e. on 28th July 2014, Police recovered Jyoti’s body with 14 stab wounds in the car parked outside the city, specifically in the Panki area.

    The IG (Kanpur Zone) Mr. Ashutosh Pandey in his interview said that Jyoti had got 7 inside and 7 outside wounds. On 29th July 2014, The Police starts to find inconsistencies in Piyush’s statements. Firstly, they thought it was a strange ind of a case overall. They had never encountered such kind of a complaint earlier. Piyush told them how he was simply thrown out of the car and how the kidnappers took the car with them with his wife in it. The first thing that puts the finger on him was that there were no stray marks, no torn or worn away clothes.

    His clothes were in a perfect state when he came to complain. If he would have tried to save Jyoti and fight the kidnappers, then his clothes would have been atleast in a ‘little’ bad condition. But his clothes were not at all torn or worn away. The second thing Was that, he took about one and a alf hour to complain. This showed that he did not think of it as any kind of an urgent situation to file a complaint when his wife got kidnapped. It shows that he was not tensed or in a hurry to save his wife from the kidnappers.

    Plus, he came to complain along with his family members which was in itself a very strange thing. Lastly, any kind of kidnapper would first ensure that the person running way does not have any gadget which can be used to inform others but Piyush’s mobile phone was found safe and sound with him. Also, his statements were found to be contradictory in many ways and had namoly in them. All these things made the Police suspect Piyush to be the culprit. Mr. Pandey also explained why they thought it was not a case of loot or anything of such kind.

    First, Piyush had his mobile phone. Secondly, they had murdered Jyoti in the car and left the car properly parked in the area. Honda Accord, which Is a quite expensive car was not stolen by the kidnappers even after having such a great opportunity. There were many expensive accessories in the car which they had not even touched. They were not at all disturbed from their original places. All these things showed it was ot a case of loot. On 30th July 2014, The Police arrested Piyush and alleged that he is the mastermind. They also arrested Awadhesh and Renu.

    The same day, the police revealed that Jyoti knew about Piyush’s extramarital affair but decided to remain mum at first. Later, she complained to her in laws about it when she started to notice that Piyush would disspear every night between lam to 4am, after it happened for three continuous days. According to the Police probe, Piyush and Manisha had always wanted to marry each other but couldn’t do so because their parents called off their marriage plans after a oroscope mismatch and for other social and religious reasons.

    On 31 stJuly 2014, Manisha was arrested on charges of murder and criminal conspiracy. Sonu and Ashish Kashyap were arrested as well. Now when Piyush thought its useless to make excuses anymore, he confessed to his crime. He confessed to having an affair with the woman living next door, Manisha Makhija, who was believed to be pregnant and had been pressuring him to marry her. Piyush also said he wanted to get rid of his wife who had come to know of their illicit relationship on her parents visit on Rakhabandhan.

    On 1st August 2014, The Police said Piyush was in regular ouch with the Killers through the phone while the murder took place. They also recovered earings and gold rings worn by Jyoti along with the keys of Honda Accord and a handerchief used by the killers to remove the blood stains. Ashish told the Police that ‘supari’ for Jyoti’s murder was fixed at Rs. 50,000 out of which Rs. 30,000 was paid in advance. Sonu confirmed Ashish’s claim. On 2nd August 2014, Circle Officer kisses Piyush’s forehead in front of the media.

    He was showing love and affection to him and said to Piyush “Promise me that you will not do any such thing again which will bring embarrassment to you and your family. He was transferred. On 4th August 2014, The court allowed Police remand of the accused and the Police seized a diary said to be written by the victim in which she alleged that she was mentally harassed by her husband, Piyush. On 5th August 2014, District administration raids barracks of Piyush and Manisha and seize Pizza and Burger wrappers after reports of preferential treatment by jail authorities.

    Police also recovered the knife used in the crime. On 1 lth August, 2014, It was revealed that Piyush had made in total 1200 phone calls that month out of which 630 calls were made to Manisha and 360 calls were made to her rom other phone number too. Manisha had also contacted Piyush approximately 663 times by her cellphone that month. On 10th September, 2014, The court ordered the DNA test of the accused because they found human flesh and hair in Jyoti’s nails which was suspected to be of the accused. On 17th October, 2014 The prosecution amended the charges against the accused, including Piyush and Manisha.

    Chief Metropolitan Magistrate ( CMM ) Satyadev Gupta permitted the amendment of some sections. Prosecution had withdrawn sections 147 (roit), 323 (thrashing) and 392 (Loot) of IPC from the accused named – Piyush, Manisha, Awadhesh Tripathi, Renu Kannaujia, Sonu and Ashish Kashyap. On 5th November 2014, His parents, 0m Prakash Dasani and Poonam Dasani and his cousins, Mukesh and Kamlesh got bail from the court. The court had summoned them to appear in the court on 7th but all the four surrendered in the court then and there and got bail.

    The court submitted that police had made them accused Of section 201, causing dissapearence Of Evidence, which is a bailable offence. Therefore, they were liable to get bail. On 8th November, 2014, The CMM of Kanpur ordered presence of the accused’s parents in the court but they failed to appear. The IG (Kanpur Zone) Mr. Ashutosh Pandey in his interview with a crime reporter also revealed that Piyush visited Manisha before taking Jyoti out to dinner that night and gave Manisha a blackberry phone. He asked her to destroy the 2 sim cards he gave her to converse with him. That very evening between 6. 0pm and 9. 55pm, he talked to Awadhesh from his blackberry phone around 6 to 7 times. Awadhesh’s phone location was also seen near Verandah at that time. This was all of the case history of the Jyoti Dasani Murder case. LAWS APPLICABLE There are certain laws applicable to the Case. The accused ” Piyush Dasani, Manisha Makhija, Awadhesh Tripathi, Sonu and Ashish Kashyap and Renu would be prosecuted and punished under the Indian Penal Code, 1860. It is an act enacted by the parliament Of India in 1 860 and it defines all acts Of criminal nature and the punishment for them.

    Sonu, Renu, Ashish and Awadhesh would be prosecuted under sections 302, 201, 120 B, 364, 404 and 34 of Indian Penal Code, Piyush would be prosecuted under sections 302, 120 B, 201, 203 and 34 and Manisha would be prosecuted under sections 302, 120 B and 201 of the act. Now will list what each sections means from the ext paragraph onwards! Section 302 defines the punishment for murder According to this section – ‘Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine. All the accused in the case shall be punished under this section because all of them together conspired to kill her with the common intention of killing her but the final result is yet to come. One of the most famous case law of this section is ‘K. M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra’. Some of the other case laws include Gurpreet Singh vs State of Punjab on 9 November, 2005 , Abdul Aziz vs State f Rajasthan on 3 May, 2007 , Kashmeri Devi vs Delhi Administration and Anr on 25 April, 1988 and many others.

    Raman Raghav (1929 – 1995), also known as Pshyco Raman, was a psychopathic serial killer who operated in the city of Mumbai, India in the mid-1960s. He was diagnosed with schizophrenia after his arrest. Very little is known about RaghaVs early life or circumstances that led him to commit the crimes. He was arrested under section 302 Indian Penal Code on charge of the murder of two persons : Lalchand Jagannat Yadav and Dular Jaggi Yadav at Chinchawli village, Malad, Greater Bombay. He was described as tall, well-built and dark complexioned.

    Section 201 defines Causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender According to this section “”Whoever, knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, causes any evidence of the commission of that offence to disappear, with the intention of screening the offender from legal punishment, or with that intention gives any information respecting the offence which he knows or believes to be false; if a capital offence. ”shall, if the offence which he knows r believes to have been committed is punishable with death, be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine; if punishable with imprisonment for life. ”and if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment which may extend to ten years, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine; if punishable with less than ten years’ imprisonment”and if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for any erm not extending to ten years, shall be punished with imprisonment of the description provided for the offence, for a term which may extend to one- fourth part of the longest term of the imprisonment provided for the offence, or with fine, or with both.

    Illustration A, knowing that B has murdered Z, assists B to hide the body with the intention of screening B from punishment. A is liable to imprisonment of either description for seven years, and also to fine. ” Piyush will be prosecuted under this section because he did both – disappearance of evidence and gave false information to the police. Manisha ill also be punished because she destroyed the sim cards and the blackberry phone given by Piyush which means she tried to disappear the evidences.

    The co accused will also be punished. Some of the case laws includes – Hanuman vs State of Rajasthan on 25 November, 1993, Kajju Lal vs State of Rajasthan on 8 September, 2006 , V. L. Tresa vs State of Kerela on 9 February, 2001 and many others. One of them most famous case law of this section is : Prithipal Singh vs. State of Punjab. Section 120B: Punishment of criminal conspiracy.

    According to this section ” “(1 ) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence unishable with death, imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or upwards, shall, where no express provision is made in this Code for the punishment of such a conspiracy, be punished in the same manner as if he had abetted such offence. (2) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy other than a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable as aforesaid shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding six months, or with fine or with both. All the accused will be punished under this section. Piyush was the main onspirator of the case and as he involved Manisha, SonU, Renu, Ashish and Awadhesh too in his conspiracy, they all were tied together with their common intention of killing Jyoti and that is why they all will be punished for criminal conspiracy. One of the most famous case law of this section is pal Singh vs. state of Punjab. Other case laws include – Anilesh Chandra And Ors. Vs. The State on 2 February, 1951.

    Section 364 defines Kidnapping or abducting in order to murder According to this section “”Whoever kidnaps or abducts any person in order that such person may be murdered or may be so disposed of as to be put in danger of eing murdered, shall be punished with 1 [imprisonment for life] or rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. Illustrations : (a) A kidnaps Z from 2[lndia], intending or knowing it to be likely that Z may be sacrificed to an idol. A has committed the offence defined in this section. (b) A forcibly carries or entices B away from his home in order that B may be murdered.

    A has committed the offence defined in this section. CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE punishment”imprisonment for life, or rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine”CognizabIe”Non-baiIable”Triable by Court of Session”Non-compoundable. ” Sonu, Ashish, Awadhesh and Renu will be prosecuted under this section because they kidnapped Jyoti from swaroop nagar with the intention of murdering her. Case laws and recent cases of this section include ” Barku Bhavrao Bhaskar v. State of Maharashtra, Kanwar Singh Meena vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, Ash Mohammed vs. Shiv Raj Singh @ Lalla Babu and Another and many others.

    Section 404 defines Dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by deceased person at the time of his death According to this section “”Whoever dishonestly misappropriates or converts o his own use property, knowing that such property was in the possession of a deceased person at the time of that person’s decease, and has not since been in the possession of any person legally entitled to such possession, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if the offender at the time of such person’s decease was employed by him as a clerk or servant, the imprisonment may extend to seven years.

    Illustration Z dies in possession of furniture and money. His servant A, before the money comes into the ossession of any person entitled to such possession, dishonestly misappropriates it. A has committed the offence defined in this section. CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE punishment”imprisonment for 3 years and fine”Non-Cognizable”Bailable”Triable by Magistrate of the first class”Norn-compoundable. If by clerk or person employed by deceased: Punishment”lmprisonment for 7 years and fine”Non- Cognizable”BailabIe”TriabIe by Magistrate of the first class”Non- compoundable. ” Case laws of this section includes – Rohtash Kumar vs. State of Haryana, Munish Mubarvs. State of Haryana.

    One of the most famous case law includes – Dhulji vs Kanchan on 27 July, 1955. Section 34 defines Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention According to this section “”When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone. ” As it was mentioned under that it was a case of criminal conspiracy, all the accused will be prosecuted under this section. Case laws of this section includes – Arvind Kumar vs. State on 19 March, 2014, 0m Prakash vs. State on 0 October, 1955, Virendra Singh vs State of M. p on 9 August, 2010 and many others.

    Section 203 defines Giving false information respecting an offence committed According to this section “”Whoever knowing or having reason to believe that an offence has been committed, gives any information respecting that offence which he knows or believes to be false, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to years, or with fine, or with both. 1 [Explanation. ”ln sections 201 and 202 and in this section the word “offence”, includes any act committed at any place out of [lndia], which, if committed in 2[lndia], would be punishable under any of the following sections, namely, 302, 304, 382, 392 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 402, 435, 436, 449, 450, 457, 458, 459 and 460. ] only pyush will be prosecuted under this section because only he gave false information to Police while filing a complaint for his wife’s kidnap-cum-murder. One of the most famous case laws of this section – State of Kerela vs Markhose on 17 November, 1 961.

    CONCLUSION The centre of attraction of the Jyoti Dasani murder case is the fates of the accused – Piyush Dasani, Manisha Makhija and the others, who were caught n the case. It is the 21 st century and this case makes it very clear to the whole Indian society that even after coming from an educational and wealthy background, people in India still have an orthodox thinking. They let a horoscope mismatch stand between the marriage of two people who wanted to get married. What if Piyush and Manisha were allowed to marry? Maybe, all this would not have happened. Maybe, Jyoti would have been alive. Maybe, Piyush, Manisha and all the other accused would have been living a healthy peaceful life. Maybe.

    Jyoti Dasani Murder Case Legal Report. (2017, Jul 20). Retrieved from

    Hi, my name is Amy 👋

    In case you can't find a relevant example, our professional writers are ready to help you write a unique paper. Just talk to our smart assistant Amy and she'll connect you with the best match.

    Get help with your paper