Back
1992 Supreme(Ori) 194
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
D.M. Patnaik, A. Pasayat, JJ.
SMT. PRAMILA DEI - APPELLANT
Versus
STATE OF ORISSA - RESPONDENT
Jail Criminal Appeal No. 313 of 1988
Decided On : 11-09-1992
Pramila Mohanty, for the Appellant; G.K. Mohanty, A.S.C., for the Respondent
Extrajudicial confessions must be carefully scrutinized and corroborated before they can be used to convict an accused person.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL LAW - MURDER - SECTION 302 IPC - EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION - SECTION 24 TO 30 OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 - ADMISSIBILITY OF CONFESSION - CORROBORATION - COURT HELD THAT THE PROSECUTION HAS FAILED TO ESTABLISH ITS CASE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
Fact of the Case:
The accused was convicted of murdering her two children, aged ten months and four years, by throwing them into a river. The prosecution's case was that the accused was motivated by the suspicion that her son was suffering from leprosy and that her husband had blamed her for it. The accused denied the charges and claimed that her husband and his brother had killed the children and then tried to kill her.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The court held that the motive for the crime was not strong enough to support a conviction, and that the evidence of an extrajudicial confession by the accused was not credible. The court also found that the prosecution had failed to explain how the accused could have taken her daughter away from the room where she was sleeping with four other people.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had proved that the accused had killed her children. 2. Whether the extrajudicial confession by the accused was admissible and credible.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The court found that the motive for the crime was not strong enough to support a conviction, and that the evidence of an extrajudicial confession by the accused was not credible. The court also found that the prosecution had failed to explain how the accused could have taken her daughter away from the room where she was sleeping with four other people.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal and set aside the conviction and sentence. The accused was ordered to be released forthwith.
JUDGMENT :
A. Pasayat, J. - "Mother is the name for God in the lips and hearts of little children ", said Thackeray in "Vanity Fair". Can the hands of a mother that rock the cradle, and in the words of W. S. Ross (The Hand That Rocks the Cradle), rule the world be responsible for the death of her two infant children, Kipling had described the love, the feelings of a mother in the following words :
"If I were hanged on the highest hill. Mother O'mine, O'mother O'mine'. I know whose love would follow me still, Mother O'mine, O,mother O'mine".
Can a mother snuff out the life of her two children ? The accusations are precisely that in the case at hand.
2. In this appeal from Jail, Pramila Dei (hereinafter referred to as the accused' calls is question legality of her conviction made Under Sections 302 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, IPC and sentences of imprisonment for life and one month's simple imprisonment respectively as awarded by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Cuttack. The sentences were directed to run concurrently.
3. The prosecution version is as follows :
Bichitra and Laxmi, son and daughter respectively of the accused were the victims. The son aged ten months and the daughter was aged four years. Being of the suspicion that Bichitra was suffering from leprosy, Khatu Das (PW 7) father-in-law of the accused wrote to his son, husband of the accused, Duryodhan Das (PW 9), who was serving at Calcutta to come to the village and to arrange treatment of his son. Duryodhan came to his village and on 30-9-1987 took his son to Aul Public Health Centre. The son was examined by the doctor, who opined that the patch which was suspected to be due to leprosy was in fact not so. An ointment was prescribed and PW 9 was advised to apply the same on the patch. In the evening PW 9 returned home along with his son Bichitra and asked his wife as to whether any member of her parents' family was affected by leprosy. The accused denied such acrimonious suggestion, and was annoyed. In the night PW 9, the accused and their son Bichitra slept in one room, while their daughter Laxmi, Khatu and some others slept in another room. At about 2 a. m. PW 9 woke up and found his wife and son missing. So he woke up his father (PW 7) and noticed that Laxmi was not present. They mace a search for them, but could not trace them out. On the next morning at about 9 a.m., Sudhakar Behera (PW 2) and Sushena Behera (PW 5) recovered the dead body of deceased Laxmi from river Kharasrota. The dead body of Bichitra was also recovered from the said river. Both the dead bodies were brought near the village and were kept under a banian tree. After some time one Arun Kumar Das (PW 3) and one Maheswar Ojha rescued the accused, who was going to be drowned in the said river. The accused confessed before PWs 3 and 4 the she wanted to commit suicide after having committed murder of her two children. Information was lodged at the Police Station, investigation was undertaken and after completion thereof charge sheet was submitted.
4. The accused pleaded her innocence. It was her further plea that her husband -was hating her as her son was affected by leprosy and in the night of occurrence her husband assaulted her and did not provide her food. On that night her husband and the older brother of her husband (PW 1) threw the two children to the river, and thereafter dragged her and pushed her inside it.
5. The learned trial Judge formulated three points for consideration on the basis of the evidence on record. They are as follows :
(i) Whether Laxmi and Bichitra died due to drowning ?
(ii) Whether the accused threw both of them inside the water with intention to cause their death ?
(ii) Whether the accused was attempting to commit suicide ?
The learned trial Judge relied on the evidence of PWs 2 and 5 so far as recovery of dead bodies from the river is concerned. He also found that the evidence of PW 3 so far as extrajudicial confession is concerned was credible.
