KURIACHEN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Suicide by reason of domestic violence perpetrated by the husband or problems arising out of pregnancy and delivery, is the question raised in the appeal filed by the convicted/accused. The appeal by the victim challenge the acquittal of A3; the sister-in-law of the deceased.

(2.) Sri.Prijith, argued for the accused appellant and Sri.Jojo A V argued for the mother of the deceased who approached this court with the victim appeal. Smt.Sheeba Thomas learned Public Prosecutor argued for the State.

(3.) Sri Prijith took us through the entire evidence and pointed out that the trial court judgment is bereft of any discussion. The conviction is based on mere surmises and conjectures and the prosecution itself was launched after a delay of nine years, that too, on the basis of a direction issued by the Kerala State Women's Commission for further investigation which order is totally without jurisdiction. The learned Counsel pointed out that the earlier FIS was suppressed from Court and so were the prior statements made by the immediate relatives of the deceased. There was no complaint at the time of death and later, the allegations surfaced only when A1 took his child to his own house. Even then the statements made to the Police did not contain many of the facts deposed before Court. PW3 was a planted witness quite evident from her deposition itself. PWs 1 and 2 spoke of the happy married life of their daughter at the first instance and then turned turtle to raise unsubstantiated allegations. Many of the statements made before Court on the marital discord and the attempts made by the wife's family to defuse it, as also the immediate cause of the suicide were not stated to the police in the S.161 statements taken after the further investigation was ordered. There is absolutely no ground to convict the accused and he deserves to be acquitted, is the compelling argument.