Sam walked into his office at 5 am and found two sub-inspectors nodding to sleep – nothing uncommon. He found early mornings to be the best time to do focused work. The quiet, cold and dark can be appealing to some.
The tea seller near the police station knew Sam’s routine, and there was a cup of fresh hot Tea on his table – left there possibly minutes before he walked in. A file lay on his table as well with a large sticky note that read :
For Inspector Sameer. Confidential Information
That must be the forensics team, he thought.
Sam settled in his chair and took a swig from his teacup. The hot drink with cardamom was perfectly brewed. For the next ten minutes, he sat quietly and enjoyed his tea. The caffeine slowly kicking in and making him alert. He picked up the file.
At first, this case had looked very easy – a homicide with enough evidence to solve it. But the evidence itself became a problem as the case unraveled. The file from forensics was a sad reminder of the same. He read through the file quickly and started to make notes once more. He prepared a rough report which read as follows:
Victim – 42-year-old male, proprietor of a laundry shop in Vashi, Navi Mumbai
Nature of incident – Death by concussion on the head with a heavy object (confirmed by forensics)
Date and time of the incident – February 06th 1999, between 12 am to 1 am.
Evidence collected –
- Victim’s fingernails had hair (possibly belonging to the criminal), indicating a struggle between the victim and the murderer.
- A shirt full of blood was recovered from the back of the store.
- Pair of shoes were found near the crime scene smeared with blood (possibly the criminal trying to runaway had slipped on the crime scene)
- The blood on the shirt recovered doesn’t match the victims’ blood (another murder?)
- Traces of blood were found leading to Vashi creek. (traces of blood match with victim’s blood)
- One sizeable wooden showpiece/mantle piece was found in the shallow part of the creek, which was used as a murder weapon (confirmed by forensics)
- A broken whiskey bottle near the victim’s body (Blood alcohol level – 0.13 – highly intoxicated)
Sam started writing further.
On the morning of Feb 06th 1999, Belapur Crime Branch received a call from Vashi police station about a homicide. On analysing the crime scene, the evidence stated above was found. The victim, 42-year-old, was a resident of Vashi – Late Mr Sooraj Chaddha (Identity confirmed from the documents and hereby will be referred to as the victim)
The victim was about 100kg, 5 feet 10 inches in height, with a slight stooping posture—a burnt mark on the left cheek. The victim owned a laundry shop close to the Vashi highway, 800 meters from the creek entrance. The victim has no known family. The victim was relocated from Haryana state to Navi Mumbai about 12 years ago. Shop ownership documents show the victim owned the said laundry place since August 19th August 1987.
The laundry place is located alongside a long lane of shops – starting from the other end; there is a travel agent, a bakery, a small restaurant, a hairdresser and beauty parlour, a stationary store and the victim’s laundry store. The victim is known to all these owners, who confirm they have never seen the victim socialising with anyone. They also confirmed that the victim had no home and he lived in his shop the entire time.
The victim had hired a boy to work in his store since past 10 months. The boy is a minor (age 17) and a runaway living in the slum beside the railway track.
Details of the boy – Ravi Shinde, height 5 feet 11 inches, born and brought up in Kherwadi, Nagpur, has been reported missing for the last ten months. He has been working with the victim for the last eight months – clean record.
The night before the incident, Ravi Shinde was participating in illegal gambling in a club nearby from February 05th at 10 pm to February 06th at 3 am. The manager of the club, Mr S.V Shetty, confirms Ravi’s presence in the club till 3 am. Few others who were questioned confirm the same.
One eyewitness on the crime scene says he saw suspicious activity. A man in long hair ran around the store at around 01:30 am on February 06th (which coincides with the murder time). The eyewitness is a street tea vendor who was about 600 meters away from the crime scene. He was walking towards the opposite side of the creek.
Statement by the eyewitness
Name – Ashok More
Occupation – Tea seller on Vashi highway
Statement – “I was preparing Tea for the morning, and I ran out of hot water. I knew a guy who provided me with hot water and went to him. It was about 0130am when I saw a large bulky man with long hair running away towards the Vashi creek. He had something round and big in his hand. I couldn’t see his face because he was running away from me. He wore a faded grey shirt and blue or maybe black pants. I’m not sure if he wore any shoes since it was dark. Later, I picked up my hot water and returned to my tea stall.”
A suspect description has been released to nearby police stations on February 07th 1999.
Suspect description – Male, long hair, approximately 6 feet in height, bulky stature, wearing a faded grey T-shirt and dark pants. The suspect was spotted running towards Vashi creek.
The last customer visiting the laundry store was Mr. Shyam Agarwal, who lives close by. He confirms that at 930pm on February 05th 1999, he saw the victim Mr. Chaddha in his store alone. They both talked for a few minutes, smoked a cigarette, and then Mr. Agarwal left. He is the last eyewitness to see the store owner alive. When probed further, he confirmed that the now broken alcohol bottle was intact on a table next to the ironing board.
Sam’s hand went to a now empty cup of Tea. Disheartened, he kept it back. He would need more Tea today. By the time he finished writing his summary, the other sub-inspectors were awake, and there was a buzz of movements on the other side of the office.
He called to no one in particular. “Anyone there?”
One sub-inspector walked in and exchanged a Salute.
“Patil,” Sam said.
“Yes, sir”, replied Patil with slight eagerness
“Any important meetings today?”
“No sir. We have to go to Dholakia Contractor’s office in the evening. Nothing till then.”
“Hmm”, Sam grunted thoughtfully and then continued “, I need some time to brainstorm about the Laundryman case. Divert all my phone calls outside. Unless there is a riot or a bomb blast outside, or DCP Kapoor comes in, nobody knocks on my door. Tell Kadam to handle any tasks. Hold the ones where I’m needed till evening. Got it?”
“Yes, sir,” said Patil.
“And Patil…?”
“Yes, Sir?”
“Send me Tea. Lots of Tea.”
“Got it, sir,” said Patil leaving with another salute.
Sam closed the door and sat in his chair, a bit more relaxed and informal. He was looking up at the ceiling, his thoughts running wild.
‘The boy who worked at the store had no motive of murdering the victim. The helper was also confirmed to be present in the club by the owner himself. The tea seller on the road had no intention either.‘
‘The evidence collected doesn’t make sense. There’s too much evidence to simplify this case, but that is also the problem – too much evidence. Only a drunkard would be that oblivious to all that evidence, but a drunk would also not be able to steer clear of all of this for so long.’
‘It’s been over a week, and we still don’t have any leads. The victim had absolutely no social life or family or any fowl habits to indicate otherwise.’
‘Any story doesn’t fit all the evidence.’
‘First one: The victim was drunk when the murderer came in. They possibly argued over something; there was a struggle – which suggests hair in fingernails; the murderer grabbed the wooden piece and hit the victim’s head. Then how did the murderer slip over the victim’s blood? Collecting that much blood pouring from the wound takes a long time, and what was he doing till then? Why did he hide the shirt with blood in the back of the store? And why is the blood not matching with the victims’ blood? And when was the struggle enough to get murderers’ hair stuck in victims’ nails?‘
‘The blow by the object was on the back of the victim’s head. The forensics confirms the presence of wooden particles near the wound, consistent with the wooden object recovered from the river.’
‘Let’s say there was more than one person involved in the incident – explains one person running with the object and the other running from the back door trying to hide the shirt. The second could have arrived after the crime was committed, panicked and slipped in the blood – explains the time taken to collect the blood – and left from the back door. Probably both murderer and the second person had no connection. But that doesn’t explain the shirt and hair in nails.’
Sam paced in his office.
‘Criminals sometimes plant evidence, but it’s a long shot in this case. The evidence was haphazard if it was meant to be planted. He thought.’
‘Usually, every murder case has one question, who committed the crime, but in this case, he also wanted to know how it was committed because nothing made sense here.’
Sam shook his head to clear some clutter.
‘These are the things which are confirmed. The victim knew the murderer; he let him in his store at night. There were few people he knew besides his regular customers and the helper boy. There could probably be a few more people he met daily. The victim was drunk, possibly even the murderer, there’s no way to say and the murder was committed with the wooden piece recovered from the creek. A man with long hair was seen running with the murder weapon, which may or may not be related to the crime. These were confirmed facts. Rest all was hazy at the moment.
Sam solved many cases in his career, he even wrote off a few cases or passed them on to other officers, but he always loved a puzzle. This case was just that, a very simple-looking yet complicated puzzle which seemed impossible to solve.
Sam later crosschecked and questioned everyone involved with the case again. He verified all the evidence and made multiple trips to the crime scene and forensics lab. It took him two years of relentless pursuit to finally label the case as Unsolved. No new evidence was recovered in those two years, and no new alibi came forward. He hated when he had to close the case but also knew that it was part of his duty. He had become close to being obsessed with the case when his seniors told him to give up on it. Today Sam is no longer working with the police, and of all cases in his career, it is this unsolved puzzle, this particularly complicated case which didn’t make sense, stuck with him.
Question to Readers: Who do you think murdered the laundryman? and How ?
Comment below