- In the case of Teena vs. State of Kerala the Hon’ble Kerala HC has acquitted a woman who was accused of killing her 9 year old son, who was her only child. This was apparently done by her to avenge her disturbed marital life.
- The case of the prosecution was that due to marital discord, to wreck vengeance against her husband she murdered her child by feeding him sleeping pills and then slitting his wrist. When he started waking up, she smothered him with a pillow. Then she herself drank some pesticide and slit her own wrist in order to commit suicide.
- The Counsel appearing for the accused argued that the trial Court’s decision was not based on the evidence that was led, else it would have exonerated the accused instead of convicting her. The post mortem report of the child clearly states death by smothering and while the alleged dying declaration of the accused does not speak of smothering at all. It was also vehemently argued that the accused did not pass away after making her statement, which makes that statement irrelevant under section 32(1).
- It was also argued that the alleged dying declaration could not be treated as a confession as well since the provisions of section 164(2) and (4) have not been compiled with. Invocation of power under section 311 of CrPC was also questioned by the Counsel for the accused when he said that it seemed that the learned Judge himself tried to step into the shoes of the prosecutor and tried to convict the accused.
- Reliance was placed by the Counsel for the accused on a multitude of cases including Shivappa vs. State of Karnataka (1995)2 SCC, Parmanand Pegu vs. State of Assam (2004)7 SCC and Kishan Lal vs. State of Rajasthan (2000)1 SCC, among others.
- The HC, at the outset, observed that the it would be unfair to attribute the motive of the murder and suicide solely on the fact that she hated her husband and her sour marriage and she did the same due to the sole reason that she was vengeful. The Court also noted that the husband in this case was an addict and had a history of mental illness. It was alleged by the accused that he had been abusive on multiple occasions. However, the Court was unable to attribute this as her motive to commit the offense.
- The HC also objected to the reliance that was placed by the trial Court Judge on the dying declaration of the accused. It was held by the HC that the moment a dying declaration transformed into a confession because of the maker not passing away but surviving, and in cases where there is a possibility that the maker is himself the accused, the Magistrate ought to pause and comply with the provisions of section 164(2) to (4) of CrPC.
- The HC also noted that as per section 32 of the Evidence Act, since the declarant had survived and was not under threat of imminent death, her statements cannot be treated as a dying declaration but a mere confession. The same was held to be inadmissible as it stood in violation of Article 20(3), unless it was recorded following the procedure in section 164 CrPC.
- The Court also held that the invocation of section 311 of CrPC was also bad in law, since it has been laid down in various decisions of the Hon’ble SC that there should be strong and valid reasons for the invocation of this power, which were absent in this case, particularly in the light of the fact that the Public Prosecutor had not asked for a recalling of the witnesses.
- In light of the aforesaid contentions, the Court held that the prosecution had been unable to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Hence the appeal was allowed and the conviction of the accused was set aside.
"Loved reading this piece by Shweta?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
