SUYAMBUKKANI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused/appellant belonging to Nammalvarpet was married at the age of 19 to P.W.1, a barber by profession living in I.C.F. Colony, Murthy Nagar, Villivakkam, Madras. The marital life lasted about five years and two boys, respectively aged 2 years and 10 months at the time of the occurrence, were born out of the wedlock. But there was no happiness in the family on account of the husband's callousness. He used not to give enough money for house-hold expenses. He became more addicted to drink and poverty and destitution were the lot of the mother and the children. There were constant quarrels between the spouses, the accused being inclined to go back to her parents' house along with her husband, but the husband, P.W.1, being obstinately opposed to such a course. He would not even willingly allow the accused to go to her parents' house. He has even ordered his wife not to meet her mother or brother and that none of them should come to his house. However, whenever situation became unbearable the accused/appellant used to go to her parents, who after keeping her for some time would send her back to her husband's house with some money. The accused would endure the ill-treatments meted out to her, but it was hard to her to swallow the total absence of care and affection of the husband towards the children. Even when they were sick she will have to carry both of them herself and he would not oblige by carrying one of them. Under the above circumstances, the younger child has fallen sick for about a month. Then she managed to get permission to go to her parent's house where she stayed for 10 days and come back on 25-6-1983. She was scolded for having remained for such a longtime in her parents' house. She on the contrary on account of the continuous bad health of the small baby wanted to go back. Misunderstanding and quarrel between spouses reached a climax and she was beaten upon her return, that morning and evening on 26-6-1983 and also on the 27th in the morning and at the lunch time. P.W.1 who left the house after lunch came back home at about 9.30 p.m. on the 27th and found the door open without anybody inside. Upon enquiry with neighbours he learnt that she left the house. Hewent to his parents-in-law searched for the accused and the children during night time and their search proved fruitless. On the next morning, P.W.2 witnessed the poignant spectacle of the accused and her two children in a well in the I.C.F. colony in the neighbourhood of P.W.1's house. With the help of some neighbours and a rope, P.W.2 went into the well and took out the accused and the two children at about 6.30 a.m. The children were found dead and the accused was motionless. P.W.2 went to meet P.W.1, informed him about the tragedy, and threatened him. The accused told P.W.2 that life having become unbearable to her and as she was not willing to leave the children alone she jumped into the well after ascertaining that there was water on 27-6-1983 at 2.00 p.m. in order to commit collective suicide. However, when she landed into the well she did not die since there was not enough water and she remained in the well thoughout the night.

(2.) The father of the accused went to the I.C.F. Police station and narrated all the circumstances to P.W.1 1, Inspector of Police, who recorded the same as the first information report Ex.P-12. P. W. 11 took up investigation, which was made rather simple on account of the elaborate confession made by the accused and he filed a report under Sec.173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the effect that offences under Secs.302 (2 counts) and 309, I.P.C., appeared to have been committed by the accused, charges were framed accordingly by the Sessions Court.

(3.) The prosecution produced the evidence collected during the course of investigation, the main piece of evidence being the detailed judicial confession by the accused narrating her motives and acts. That confession was supplemented and corroborated in respect of the strained relations between the spouses and the ill-treatments meted out by P.W.1 by the testimony of P.W.2. In respect of the injuries and cause of deaths we have the medical evidence of P.Ws.6 and 8. P.W.8, doctor who examined the accused on 28-6-1983 at 7.45 p.m. found injuries on her body. P. W.6, doctor, who conducted the post-mortem of the two children, found several abrasions on the body of the children and opined mat both of them died of asphyxia due to drowning.