AYISHATH RUMAISA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has been now arrayed as accused in crime No. 314/2019 of Vidyanagar Police Station, Kasaragod district, in which the offence alleged therein now is one under Sec.302 of the IPC . Earlier the said crime was registered under the provisions of the 174 of the Cr.PC on account of the unnatural death of the two year old child of the petitioner herein.

(2.) According to the Prosecution, the petitioner herein now aged about 19 years, is the daughter of the defacto complainant and that the petitioner has been married to one Abdul Kareem and about two years back, given birth to a child and due to marital discords she has been separated from her husband and has been residing with her mother (defacto complainant) for the last three months also. While so, on 21-10-2019 she had consumed a poison presumably to commit suicide and the child was also found in unconscious stage and both the petitioner and child were admitted in a hospital, it was found that the child also was poisoned and said 2 year old girl child died on 21-10-2019. The medical condition of the petitioner was also serious and while she was hospitalised her statement was recorded by the Police, wherein it is revealed that she had consumed poison, which was mixed with mayonnaise sauce. According to her, the child also may have taken and consumed it. According to the Police, the subsequent investigation has revealed that, the petitioner had administered poison to the child, which resulted in the death of the child and that the petitioner had also consumed poison in her to attempt to commit suicide. The petitioner was treated and she did not die and later the Police has altered the offence to that as per Sec.302 of the IPC , and has arrayed the petitioner herein as the sole accused therein for the said offence. According to the prosecution, the petitioner has administered poison to the child, which resulted to the death of child and therefore, the petitioner has committed the offence as per Sec.302 of the IPC.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that there are no cogent materials to implicate the petitioner for the abovesaid offence. Further that the petitioner is a young lady, hardly aged 19 years, and subjected to great emotional and traumatic experience due to marital disputes and that present mental condition is not fit and in case this Court do not grant anticipatory bail to her, then this Court may grant atleast three weeks time to the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer, so that her bail application could be considered and decided by jurisdictional court below concerned etc., on the same day of her production, after the completion of the interrogation.