When she was 14, Jyoti, a single mother of three, began receiving messages from a man named Dhananjay, a “boyfriend” who claimed to be a “high school student”.
“He was a very popular boy at school and had been with us for a long time,” she says.
Jyori, now 24, says Dhanans “awesome” behavior with her friends but found it hard to hide the fact that her relationship with him was “unnatural”.
“My mother’s a housewife.
She always had us at home and she was my mother, so she was very controlling.
Or do you want kids? “
He would say that to me like ‘Do you want to get married?
Or do you want kids?
She didn’t allow me to have any friends. “
My mum was very strict.
She didn’t allow me to have any friends.
My mum was so controlling. “
I was very scared, and I would hide.
I was really scared. “
But he had a lot of friends in the same class as me, so I thought I would try to meet him.
Jyoti had no idea that he was also involved in a porn ring. “
I think I had a crush on him because I saw him as a ‘boyfriend’ and I was like, ‘Wow, this is amazing’.”
Jyoti had no idea that he was also involved in a porn ring.
“My mom didn’t like it.
She told me to keep quiet about my relationship with Dhanani and to go with him.
But I kept it a secret for so long.
I couldn’t even tell my parents.”
Dhananjee was convicted in 2010 of raping a 16-year-old girl in his bedroom in Delhi’s Jantar Mantar in 2011.
He was sentenced to life in prison and is currently on death row.
Dhanani’s lawyer says his client has not been able to find a lawyer and has spent more than $100,000 in legal fees to fight his case.
“It’s very sad.
I don’t want him to die.
It’s very painful,” says the lawyer.
“He is innocent, and he is doing what he wants to do.
He’s not being punished.
He has been released on bail.”
According to the Supreme Court, Jantars high court had ordered a review of Dhananes case, as a violation of the right to privacy and his right to a fair trial.
In May this year, the Supreme court allowed the appeal against the case, which is being heard by a three-judge bench.
The judges said that “the conduct of Dyananjay has been inconsistent with the norms and standards” of his profession and he was “likely to be convicted in violation of Article 19(1) of the Indian Penal Code, Section 307 (murder), Section 295 (defiling the body), Section 498 (criminal intimidation), Section 487 (sexual abuse), Section 451 (criminal conspiracy), Section 6 (criminal harassment) and other provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure”.
According to a news report published by The Hindu newspaper, Jeyoti says she is happy to have her life back.
“The only thing that is hurt is that my body is not there anymore,” she tells the paper.
“Now, I feel like I have lost a part of my life, and now I can only hope that my story can be told.”