IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.B. SURESH KUMAR, JOHNSON JOHN, JJ.
Prathibha W/o Bhashdev – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 277, 676 of 2019
Decided On : 22-11-2023
Section 299 - Offences Affecting Life - Indian Penal Code (IPC) - 299
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the alleged infanticide of the appellants' 6-month-old daughter. The accused disposed of the infant's body in the sea, claiming it was a form of burial as per their custom. The prosecution established the death occurred due to drowning and head injury.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the accused disposed of the body under the belief that the infant was not alive, and acquitted the accused of the charges under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of IPC.
Issues: The pivotal issue was whether the accused's act of disposing of the infant's body in the sea, believing it to be lifeless, would attract the offence punishable under Section 299 of the IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the accused's act did not amount to culpable homicide under Section 299 of the IPC as the intention of the accused must be judged in the light of what they supposed to be the circumstances, not the actual circumstances.
Final Decision: The appeals were allowed, the conviction of the accused under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of IPC was set aside, and the accused were acquitted.
JUDGMENT :
P.B. SURESH KUMAR, J.
1. The pivotal question that falls for consideration in these appeals is whether an act performed by a person on a body which he/she believed to be lifeless, would attract the offence punishable under Section 299 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
2. Accused 1 and 2 in S.C. No. 161 of 2016 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court I, Alappuzha, who stand convicted and sentenced for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 IPC are the appellants in the appeals. They are husband and wife respectively. Among the appeals, Crl. Appeal No. 676 of 2019 is preferred by the husband, the first accused and Crl. Appeal No. 277 of 2019 is preferred by the wife, the second accused.
3. This is an alleged case of infanticide. The accused are natives of Uttar Pradesh. One Subahani found the dead body of the infant daughter of accused 1 and 2, Sivani aged 6 months, floating in the Arabian Sea at Azheekkal, where he was baiting fish on 16.10.2015. On the basis of the information furnished by Subahani, a case was registered by Ochira Police under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (the Code). Pursuant to the registration of the case, the Sub Inspector of Police, Ochira conducted the inquest and made arrangements for autopsy. Later, having found that it is a suspected case of murder, the Sub Inspector submitted a report to that effect before the Jurisdictional Magistrate. The investigation in the case was thereafter taken over by the Inspector of Police, Karunagappally and after preliminary investigation, having found that the occurrence is one that took place within the limits of Kayamkulam Police, the file was transferred to Kayamkulam Police and the investigation of the case was continued and completed by the Inspector of Police, Kayamkulam. It is alleged in the final report filed in the case that on 21.09.2015, accused 1 and 2, due to the discontent towards their daughter Sivani, in furtherance of their common intention, caused grievous hurt to Sivani, resulting in the fracture of the elbow of her left hand. It is also alleged in the final report that later, on 12.10.2015, accused 1 and 2 caused an injury on the back of her head by hitting the same against the edge of a cot and thereby caused her death. It is further alleged in the final report that later, on 13.10.2015, accused 1 and 2, with the help of the third accused, caused destruction of the evidence of the crime by disposing of the body of the child in the Arabian Sea at Azheekkal.
4. On the case being committed for trial to the Court of Session, after hearing the prosecution and the accused, the Court of Session framed charges against the accused. The charges framed by the Court of Session against the accused are the following:
Secondly, that you, the above said accused Nos. 1 to 3, in furtherance of your common intention, had committed murder of the said Sivani on 12/10/2015 at about 2 pm by disposing of her in the Arabian Sea near the sea-wall at a place called Azheekkal, Alappadu Village and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 302 r/w. 34 IPC, within the cognizance of this court.
Lastly, that you, the above said accused Nos. 1 to 3, in furtherance of your common intention, had caused disappearance of evidence of the aforesaid brutal crimes committed by you by disposing of the dead body of the said victim child at the Azheekkal Beach, Alappadu Village during the course of the same transaction and thereby commit
Duvvur Dasratharammareddy vs. State of A.P. (1971) 3 SCC 247
Sharad Birdhi Chand Sarda vs. State of Maharashtra AIR 1984 SCC 1622 : 1984 (4) SCC 116
Circumstantial evidence can establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and if the accused believed the victim to be lifeless, it may negate culpable homicide.
The distinction between murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder hinges on the offender's intention, with insufficient evidence of intent leading to a reduced sentence.
The court emphasized the importance of considering the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment, and the nature of supporting evidence in determining the grant of bail.
Disposal of body believed lifeless after overdose not culpable homicide or murder; intention assessed by accused's belief. Bail granted as no prima facie murder case.
Bail cannot be denied based on apprehensions alone.
The court reclassified the conviction from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-II IPC due to lack of intent and motive.
To constitute culpable homicide under Indian law, intention or knowledge of likely death must be established; mere causing of death in absence of such mental state does not warrant conviction for mur....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.