LAKHIRANI DEBNATH Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In India it is a sin to be born as a girl in poverty opens Mr. K. K. Mahanta, learned counsel for the appellant (amicus curiae). Mr. Mahanta points out material on record to show that the appellant Smt. Lakhi Rani Debnath is in jail since 1980. A child was born during her jail regime. The appellant-accused was enlarged on bail by the Magistrate but no one, neither his relatives nor well-wishers or social reformers felt pity for her and her innocent child, came forward to relieve them from the bondage and give shelter. This is a cruel word. So, an innocent child was born in 1980 and grew up in jail. It must be 6 years old jail birdTT. This is the story of our social life, our respects and regards for women. She has been forsaken by all.

(2.) Upon conviction by the Sessions Judge under section 302 and sentencing her to imprisonment for life, she has frantically preferred this appeal from jail and loudly asserted that she was innocent. In this court as well the appellant was unable to engage a lawyer on account of her poverty and indigence and accordingly Mr. Mahanta has been appointed as amicus curiae.

(3.) The allegations against the accused are alleged commission of murder of her mother in-law, an eternal story of daughter-in-law killing mother-in-law and vice versa. Learned Magistrate could not enlarge the accused on personal recognition bond, perhaps he did not do it as under our prevailing archaic system some surety or bail was technical necessity. It is strange but true that not a single Home or Charitable Institution or Social Organisation came forward to take her and allow her to live a dignified life outside the jail during the pendency of the trial. This morbid picture has been shown by Mr. Mahanta from the records of the case.