- Bench: Braund, J., [Allahabad High Court]
- Appellant: Mt Dhirajia
Facts of the case:
A woman of age 20 years was tried for sec 302 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code. She wanted to go to her parental home, because her husband gave a beating to her. Therefore, she left matrimonial house in the night. While running, she turned around in panic, ran a little distance with her baby girl in her arms and then either jumped or fell into an open well which was at some little distance from the path.The result was, to put it briefly, that the little child died while the woman was eventually rescued and suffered little or no injury.
Judgment:
It is important to remember that she clearly did so in fear, as we have the clearest evidence that she looked behind her and immediately ran away from her husband. We think there has to be some degree of awareness applied to any sane person. The degree of knowledge that any individual person can be presumed to possess would naturally vary. For example, we can't apply the same degree of knowledge to an uneducated individual as we do to an educated person. But we think the knowledge has to be applied to everyone who is sane to some degree. No matter how weak a man or woman may be, and however terrified he or she may be, knowledge of the probable effect of such imminently dangerous act must have stayed with him or her in the fourth case of guilty homicide. We have already found that Mt. Dhirajia must be taken to realize that what she has done will in all probability trigger her baby's death. However this is justified by the additional condition that "such an act" must be "without any reason to incur the risk of causing death ...." Section 300's construction of this specific section is well decided. This is well decided that it is not pure murder to cause death by doing an act with the understanding that it is so imminently dangerous that it will cause death in all probability. In order for an act done with such knowledge to constitute murder it is appropriate to commit it without any reason to incur the risk of causing death or injury to the body. An act that is committed realizing its implications is not prima facie murder. Only when it can be confirmed confidently that there was no reason is it is murder. In order for an act done with such knowledge to constitute murder it is appropriate to commit it without any reason to incur the risk of causing death or injury to the body. An act that is committed realizing its implications is not prima facie murder. Only when it can be confirmed confidently that there was no reason is it is murder. The section's criteria aren't fulfilled by one of gross recklessness being the act of homicide. Besides, it must be completely inexcusable. When a risk is incurred — even a risk of the most serious possible nature that would usually result in death — taking the risk is not murder because it is inexcusable to take it. This, as we understand it, in this case is the sense of this passage from Section 300, I.P.C. Now looking at the facts of this case, which we do not need to repeat again, we do not think it is appropriate to conclude this Mt. Dhirajia did so without reason in jumping into this well. She did so in an effort to escape from her husband.The taking of her own life was not, we think, for one moment present to her mind. For that reason we think that Mt. Dhirajia was rightly acquitted under Section 309, I.P.C. the court therefore decided that Mt Dhirajia shall be punished only for 6 month under section 304 of the Indian Penal Code.
