The absence of a clear motive does not negate a murder conviction, and the defence of insanity requires proof of incapacity to understand the nature of the act, which was not established.

JUDGMENT :

(Raja Vijayaraghavan, J.)

The appellant is the accused in S.C.No.452 of 2016 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge - V, Kottayam. In the aforesaid case, she was charged under Section 302 of the IPC for committing nepoticide. By judgment dated 10.05.2018, she was found guilty by the learned Sessions Judge and was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1 lakh under Section 302 of the IPC with a default clause. Challenging the judgement, conviction and sentence, this appeal is preferred under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The summary of the prosecution’s version, as reflected in the records, is as follows:

2. Kamalakshi (PW1) and Raghavan (PW2) are octogenarians with four children. Their eldest daughter, Vijayamma, is the accused in this case. The next child is a daughter named Shyla, followed by Shaji (PW4), the father of the deceased, Rahul, a bright 12-year-old boy. Their youngest son by name is Suresh. Vijayamma worked as a nurse for over three decades. She is married to Raju and has three children, who are all employed. Shaji, a graphic designer, was working in Dubai and he had a strained relationship with Bindu (PW4), his wife. Till January 2012, their son, Rahul, was with Shaji in Dubai. However, his VISA got cancelled and he had to return back to India. Rahul was accordingly enrolled in a school at Kaipuzha and had been under the care of his grandparents.

3. On 2/9/2013, at approximately 5 p.m., Vijayamma arrived from Bombay, where she was then working, at her parental home. She approached her father, Raghavan, and requested Rs.15 lakhs. Raghavan informed her that he has already set apart properties for his two daughters and suggested that she was free to sell her share and secure the amount. Vijayamma had bought chocolates from the shop of Geetha (PW11) to give it to Rahul. That evening, she stayed in the room where the grandmother usually slept with Rahul, while Raghavan, as was his habit, slept on a cot in the sit-out. The door of the room, where Vijayamma and Rahul slept, was locked from the inside by Rahul.

4. At around 3 a.m., when Kamalakshi woke up to quench her thirst, she found that the lights were switched on and heard Vijayamma speaking to someone. When asked what had happened, Vijayamma stated that she had murdered Rahul and was reporting the incident to the police. According to the prosecution, Vijayamma strangled the boy with her pyjama string while he slept. Though no specific motive is alleged in the court charge, the attempt of the prosecution by letting in evidence was to set up a motive that the accused was very close to Shaji and she was against him reuniting with Bindu. Her father had also acceded to the request of Bindu to build a house near the family house while refusing her request for a loan. This made her vengeful towards Bindu and she felt that if Rahul is eliminated, the prospects of Shaji and Bindu reuniting would be a remote possibility.

Registration of the Crime:

5. The sequence of events is that immediately after strangling Rahul, Vijayamma dialled the police and informed them about the incident as well as the location. The call was received by PW16, the GD in charge, of the Ettumanoor Police Station. He immediately informed PW3, who was on patrol duty. PW3 reached the place and found that PW2 was lying outside. PW2 took the officer in and he found Vijayamma lying on the bed in a prone position by the side of the boy. He locked the bedroom and posted Manoj Kumar (PW14), a Civil Police Officer, on guard duty. The child as well as the accused were taken in the jeep to the Medical College Hospital, Kottayam. The child was examined by the Doctor and he was declared dead. Vijayamma was also examined by the Doctor. The Duty Medical Officer in the Casualty Department of the Medical College examined Vijayamma and thereafter, she was produced before the Gandhi Nagar Police Station along with Ext.P1 report. On the basis of