Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ARUNA JAGADEESAN
Nageshkumar
Versus
State by Inspector of Police R4 Pondy Bazaar Police Station Chennai
Crl.A.No.208 of 2005
Decided On :20-01-2010
IPC - Criminal Appeal - Section 305, Section 306 - Summary of the acts and sections referenced and discussed by the court: The court discussed the evidence presented under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, the letters written by the deceased, and the conduct of the accused. The court also referred to legal principles established in cases such as Sat Pal Vs. Delhi Administration and Md.Hoshan and another Vs. State of AP to interpret the concept of mental cruelty and instigation for the commission of an offence.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased Ramadevi and her children committed suicide due to persistent and unabated harassment and mental torture inflicted by the accused persons. The court analyzed the evidence, including letters written by the deceased, to establish the mental agony and cruelty suffered by the deceased and her children.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the Appellant guilty of creating circumstances that forced the deceased and her children to commit suicide. The court considered the evidence of mental cruelty and the conduct of the accused in reaching its decision.
Issues: The issues revolved around the evidence of mental cruelty, instigation for the commission of suicide, and the responsibility of the accused in creating circumstances that led to the suicide of the deceased and her children.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the evidence of mental cruelty, the concept of instigation for the commission of an offence, and the responsibility of the accused in creating circumstances that led to the suicide of the deceased and her children to establish the guilt of the Appellant.
Final Decision: The Criminal Appeal was dismissed, and the bail granted to the Appellant was cancelled. The period of sentence already undergone by the Appellant was ordered to be set off, and the concerned court was directed to secure his presence and commit him to prison to undergo the remaining period of sentence.
This Criminal Appeal is filed against the judgment dated 24.2.2005 passed in SC.No.281/2002 by the Magalir Neethimandram, Chennai convicting and sentencing the appellant/A1 for the offence under Section 305 of IPC to undergo ten years of Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-, in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for six months and for the offence under Section 306 (two counts) to undergo seven years Rigorous Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-, in default to undergo Simple Imprisonment for two months.
2. The case of the Prosecution is as follows:-
a. The deceased Ramadevi is the wife of the Appellant/A1. A2 and A3 are the parents of the Appellant. PW.2 Narasima Naidu is the father of the deceased Ramadevi and PW.1 Gayathri Devi is her sister. PW.3 Saradha is the friend of Ramadevi. The deceased Raghul and Lakshmi are the son and daughter of the deceased Ramadevi. The marriage between Ramadevi and the Appellant took place on 19.8.1978. At the time of marriage, PW.2 gave 50 sovereigns of jewels apart from 10 acres of land and two houses to the deceased Ramadevi. All of them were residing in a joint family at Nellore, Andhra Pradesh. During 1983-1985 the parents and brother of the Appellant were residing in the upstairs and the family of the Appellant was residing in the down stairs. During 1985, A2 and A3 came to Chennai and during 1996, the deceased Ramadevi came along with her Children to join her husband at Chennai.
b. Right from the time of marriage, the deceased Ramadevi was ill-treated by her husband and in-laws and the Appellant used to beat her and the accused persons always used to harass the deceased Ramadevi by demanding money from her father. There were misunderstandings between the Appellant and the deceased Ramadevi. The Appellant sent a notice for divorce from her and due to intervention of the elders, the matter was compromised. During 1994, the deceased Ramadevi was living with her parents and the Appellant did not allow her to see her children. The deceased Ramadevi with the assistance of PW.3 was seeing the children only in the School. Ramadevi was also complaining that she was not given proper food. After coming to Chennai, Ramadevi was complaining to her sister that the accused persons were not willing to pay money to continue the Engineering Course of Raghul, the deceased son of the Appellant and her daughter Lakshmi was having a cleft, which necessitated to undergo an operation. The second and 3rd accused always teased Lakshmi on that account and openly said that they can save money if Lakshmi died. Similarly, they also felt it as a burden to pay money to Raghul for his Engineering course. She was also informing to her sister that the second and third accused have felt that with the arrival of Ramadevi, the expenditure has increased and the abortion she underwent also incurred some unnecessary expenditure.
d. During 1998 the Appellant along with his wife and children had been to Thirupathy. During that time, Raghul had told PW.1 Gayathri that they would visit her at Nellore. The photographs taken in Thirupathy are marked as Ex.D5 (series) and the negatives are Ex.D6 (series). But, Raghul did not visit Nellore, but only sent the telegram/Ex.P2. Ex.P3 is the letter dated 9.5.1996 sent by Raghul to Gayathri. Because of greed over money, A1 to 3 tortured Ramadevi and her children and therefore, all of them decided to commit suicide.
e. On 14.8.1998 the Appellant took food in the house of A2 and A3 and went to his house and found that the door was locked and he came to her parents house to take duplicate key. With the duplicate key, the Appellant was not able to open the door, since the door was locked from inside. The Appellant/A1, A2 and DW.1 suspected that some thieves would have caused injuries to the children and therefore, they went to the Police Station and informed the police and gave a complaint and the Police broke open the door and found Ramadevi and her chi
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
