IN THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S. Nagamuthu, V.S. Ravi, JJ.
Vijaya - Appellant
Vs.
State - Respondent
Crl. A. (MD) No. 78 of 2009
Decided On: 19.08.2015
Strangulation - Criminal Appeal - Section 302 I.P.C., Section 307 I.P.C., Section 309 I.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of her son and attempted murder of her daughter. The prosecution alleged that she hanged herself after giving poison to her children. The medical evidence was inconclusive, and the prosecution failed to prove the cause of death or poisoning beyond reasonable doubt.
Finding of the Court:
The prosecution failed to prove the cause of death or poisoning beyond reasonable doubt. The court found that the evidence was insufficient to establish the appellant's guilt and acquitted her of all charges.
Issues: Cause of death, poisoning, and attempted suicide
Ratio Decidendi: The prosecution must prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Inconclusive medical evidence and lack of definitive proof led to the acquittal.
Final Decision: The appellant was acquitted of all charges due to insufficient evidence.
S. Nagamuthu, J.
1. The appellant is the sole accused in S.C. No. 227 of 2008, on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai. By Judgment, dated 03.04.2009, the Trial Court convicted her under all the three charges and sentenced her to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C., to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month, for the offence under Section 307I.P.C. and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 309 I.P.C. The sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. Challenging the said conviction and sentence, the appellant is before this Court, with this Criminal Appeal.
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows:-
The deceased in this case was one Jeyasuriya, aged hardly 9 years. P.W.3, Jeyasanthiya, is aged 7 years. These two children are the son and daughter respectively of the accused. The accused was already married to one Mr. Jeyaraman. The children were born to them. 1½ years prior to the occurrence, the appellant's husband Mr. Jeyaraman died in a motor cycle accident. After that, the accused along with her children was living with her father-in-law and mother-in-law at Ambattaiyanpatti Village. After some time, the father of the accused and her father-in-law decided to give her in marriage to the brother of her husband. Accordingly, marriage was celebrated in Thirupparankundram between the accused and Mr. Rajaram. Thereafter, they were all living together as a joint family in the same village.
3. While so, since the children had vacation holidays for the school, the father of the accused had taken them to his house. They stayed there with him for about 10 days. The school was to open on 04.10.2007. Therefore, on 03.10.2007, the children were brought back to the house of the accused. After that, the accused kept mum and she did not freely speak to others.
4. While so, it is alleged that the accused was eve-teased by the villagers for having married her brother-in-law within one year of the death of her husband. This, according to the prosecution, made her to depress. During the night intervening 04.10.2007 and 05.10.2007, the accused and her children were in the house. P.W.1, namely, her father-in-law and her mother-in- law had gone to a different place, where they were sleeping. It was a normal practice of the workers, working in the rice mill owned by P.W.1 to get tea prepared for the employees as the mill used to run during night hours. In the usual course, P.W.4, one of the mill workers, had come to the house and knocked at the door, in order to get tea from the accused. But, she did not open. He went and informed P.W.1 and others. Then, all of them came to the house and knocked at the door. But, nobody from inside opened it. When they peeped through the key hole, they found the accused hanging by means of saree from fan hook on the terrace. Immediately, they pushed the door, opened it, went inside and removed her from the rope. In the same room, they found the children in unconscious state. Two tumblers were found near them. Then, they immediately rushed the accused and children to the Government Hospital at Usilampatti.
5. P.W.11, Dr. Gokulnath Premchand, examined the accused at 02.00 a.m. on 05.10.2007. She was in unconscious state. There was a ligature mark on the neck. P.W.11, immediately admitted her in the hospital after making entries in the Accident Register (Ex.P.13). Then, for better treatment, she was sent to Madurai Government Rajaji Medical College Hospital. According to P.W.11, the said ligature mark on the neck, would have been caused by hanging.
6. Immediately, he examined P.W.3, Selvi. Jeyasanthiya, aged 6 years. She was conscious. She told the doctor that on 04.10.2007, at abou
AI
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.