VAHITHA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGE is made to the judgment dated 15.10.2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahalir Neethimandram, Perambalur in S.C. No.9 of 2008, whereby the sole accused stood charged, tried and found guilty of infanticide and awarded the punishment of life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- in default to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for six months on being found guilty under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) THE short facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal can be status thus:- (i) P.W.1 is the mother-in-law of the appellant/accused. P.W.2 is the daughter of P.W.1. THE appellant/accused belongs to Kolakkudi village. THE marriage took place eight years prior to the occurrence. A female child was born and she was six years old. At the time of marriage, her husband Abdul Rahim was employed in foreign Countries and he was sending money all along. THE appellant was living in her parent's house. (ii) Prior to the occurrence, her husband made a request to his wife that she should live with his parents, since she was spending all the money lavishly. Hence, P.W.6 father of the appellant took her to Perambalur and left her with her child and went to native place. THE accused stayed in the house of P.W.2 for few days and thereafter, came to the house of P.W.1. THE accused was actually quarreling with her mother-in-law since she was not interested in putting her child for education at Perambalur. (iii) On the date of occurrence i.e. 21.6.2007 P.W.1 left the accused after preparing tea and went outside to get idli for the child. At that time, the appellant alone was inside the house along with her child. After sometimes later, when she came to the house, she witnessed that the appellant was strangulating the child and then she shouted at her. P.W.1 informed the same to P.Ws.2 and 3. THE accused ran away from the place of occurrence. When they went near the child, they found the that the child is dead. (iv) THEreafter, P.W.1 went to the respondent-police and gave Ex.P1 report and P.W.10 Sub Inspector of Police on the strength of the same, registered a case in Crime No.328 of 2007 for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. First Information Report Ex.P10 and complaint Ex.P1 were despatched to the Court. (v) P.W.12 Inspector of Police took up investigation, proceeded to the spot, made an inspection and prepared observation mahazar Ex.P2 and rough sketch Ex.P12 respectively. He also took photographs through P.W.11 Photographer and the photographs are marked as Ex.P11. He also conducted inquest on the dead body in the presence of witnesses and panchayatars and the inquest report is marked as Ex.P13. THEreafter, he recovered M.O.1 mat and M.O.2 pillow from the place of occurrence under the cover of mahazar Ex.P7. (vi) Pursuant to the requisition made by the Investigating Officer, P.W.8 Doctor Saravanan conducted post-mortem on the dead body and issued post-mortem Certificate Ex.P5, wherein he opined that the child would appear to have died of strangulation and further the child died 6 to 12 hours prior to autopsy. He noted the following injuries in the post-mortem Certificate:- "External:- (1) Ligature mark present in front of neck of 20cm x 2cm on C/s - congested present. Hyoid bone taken for analysis." (vii) Pending investigation, P.W.12 Inspector of Police arrested the accused on 21.6.2007 at about 4.30 p.m. She gave confession statement voluntarily and the same was recorded in the presence of witnesses. THE admissible portion of the same are marked as Ex.P9. Following the same, he produced M.O.3 saree and the same was recovered under the cover of mahazar Ex.P8. He examined the witnesses and recorded their evidence. On completion of investigation, final report is filed. THE case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Necessary charges were framed against the accused.

(3.) ADVANCING arguments on behalf of the appellant, Mr.Ganesh Rajan, learned counsel would submit that in the instant case, the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case. The prosecution case is that on 21.6.2007 at 8 a.m., the accused/appellant strangulated the child and caused her death. P.Ws.1 to 3 have been examined as eye witnesses before the Trial Court.