Full Breakdown
Death Penalty Handed to Three in Chhattisgarh for 2024 Police Officer’s Family Murder
By Drooid · · How we work
Court Verdict
On October 8, 2026, a Fast-Track Court in Surajpur district, Chhattisgarh, sentenced three accused—Kuldeep Sahu, Chandrakant Chaudhary and Phool Singh alias Rinku (28)—to death. A fourth accused, Aryan Vishwakarma alias Goldy, received a life-imprisonment term. The judgment follows the conviction of all four men for the rape and murder of a police head constable’s wife and her minor daughter.
Background of the Crime
Police allege that the offences were planned and carried out on October 13, 2024 (a scheduled date in official records). According to the investigation, Sahu, described as a repeat offender and “history-sheeter,” entered the constable’s home with his three associates, sexually assaulted the 35-year-old woman, and killed both her and her daughter. The daughter’s age is reported inconsistently: some accounts list her as 11 years old, while others state she was 12. Post-mortem examinations classified both deaths as homicidal.
Judicial Reasoning
District and Additional Sessions Judge Anand Prakash Wariyal classified the case as “rarest of the rare,” citing the “exceptionally brutal, barbaric and diabolical” nature of the crimes. The court noted the lack of any provocation, the victims’ defenselessness, and the accused’s history of violent offences. It also concluded that the three death-penalty convicts showed “no chance of reformation” based on probation reports and prior criminal records spanning more than a decade.
Data & Statistics
- Accused: 4 (three sentenced to death, one to life).
- Ages of convicted men: 32, 28, 28, and 20.
- Victim ages: 35-year-old woman; daughter reported as 11 or 12 years old.
- Injury marks: 33 on the woman’s body, 28 on the child’s body.
- Criminal history: Kuldeep Sahu is linked to over 22 cases since 2015, including a prior attempt to run over police officers with a car.
Official Statements & Responses
Government counsel Subhash Sharma emphasized the seriousness of the offence, stating that the punishment must serve as a deterrent. The court’s order highlighted public outrage, noting that hundreds gathered outside the courtroom on the day of judgment and some shouted for immediate vigilante justice.
The elder brother of the constable, speaking to media, expressed relief at the verdict, saying the decision would help his family cope with their grief and that the police department had supported them throughout the ordeal.
Conflicting Reports & Gaps
- Victim’s age: The daughter is described as 11 years old in some reports (The Hindu, ThePrint, Tribune India) and as 12 years old in others.
- Name spelling: The judge’s surname appears as “Wariyal” in most sources but as “Variyal” in the Indian Express article.
These discrepancies illustrate gaps in the publicly available record and underscore the need for consistent reporting.
Verbatim Quotes
- “The gravity of the offence was very serious and it was committed without any provocation,” — Subhash Sharma — Subhash Sharma