ABDUL AM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Criminal Appeal No. 496 of 1984 has been filed by accused 2 and 3 and Crl. Appeal No. 9 of 1985 has been filed by the first accused in Sessions Case No. 140 of 1983 of the Sessions Court, Tellicherry. First accused was tried for the offence of murder of now deceased Nabeesa (S. 302 I. P. C.), offence of voluntarily causing hurt to Maimoon (S. 323 I.P.C.) and offence of attempt to commit murder of PW 4 (S. 307 I P.C.) and other accused were tried for these offences as abettors under S.114 I.P.C. Second accused was tried for the offence of attempt to commit murder of three months old baby Shahul Hameed (S. 307 I.P.C) and other accused as abettors under S.114I.P.C. There were also charges under S.342 and 506(i) I.P.C. against all the accused. The Sessions Court convicted the first accused under S.302 I.P.C. and ether accused as abettors thereof, convicted the second accused under S.307 I.P.G. for the offence of attempting to commit murder of the baby and the first accused as abettor, first accused under S.506 (i) I.P.C. and all the accused under S.342 I.P.C. All the accused were acquitted of the charge under S.307 I.P.C. relating to the alleged attempt to commit murder of PW 4 and causing simple hurt under S.323 I P.C. Further, third accused was acquitted of the charge under S.307 I.P.C. read with S.114 relating to the offence of attempt to commit murder of the baby and accused 2 and 3 were acquitted of the charge under S.506 (i) I.P.C. For the offence under S.302 I.P.C. sentence of imprisonment of life was imposed, for the offence under S.307 I.P.C. sentence of rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs. 200/- and in default of payment of fine S.I. for two months was imposed, for the offence under S.342 I.P.C. sentence of R.I. for six months was imposed and for the offence under S.506 (i) I.P.C. sentence of R.I. for one year was imposed. Sentences were directed to run concurrently. Accused are aggrieved by the conviction and sentence entered against them.

(2.) Prosecution case can be summarised as follows: Deceased Nabeesa was suffering from epilepsy during her youth. For treatment her father approached first accused, who was undertaking quack treatment for mental disorders. When treatment was not successful first accused advised that disease will be cured if she married. A proper alliance could net be arranged. First accused himself married her about 1 1/2 years prior to the occurrence. A baby, Shahul Hameed, was born to them, about two months prior to the occurrence. After the marriage, first accused started living with his wife in her house along with her parents, brothers, sister etc. PWs. 4 and 7, sisters of Nabeesa, were living in their own houses in the neighbourhood. One of the brothers, PW 6, was living five miles away. First accused used to conduct 'Nerchas' and undertake treatment for mental disorders at this house.

(3.) Since a week prior to the occurrence, PW 1, brother of Nabeesa was working in the house of the second accused situated about five miles away. Second accused was found to be behaving abnormally on 11-8-1983. PW 5, wife of second accused requested PW 1 to fetch first accused. First accused went there and started conducting Nerchas. On 12-8-1983 first accused took the second accused and another person to Vanchiyam mosque. On 13-8-1983 on the ground that the condition of the second accused had worsened first accused took him to the house of his parents in law, where he was residing. On his message, PW 1 took PW 5 and children to the house on the evening of 13-8-1983. Third accused was also present. On that day as well as on the succeeding days Nercha was conducted, though during day time second accused was ail right. Nabeesa's father was absent as be was undertaking a fast in the mosque.