SUSHILA DEVI Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
LAWS(UTN)-2012-2-11
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on February 29,2012

SUSHILA DEVI Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) On the information given by the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat to the effect that the body of a child is hanging from a tree, Patwari went to the locality, where after, he prepared inquest report. In the inquest report it was indicated that the dead body is being recovered from a tree where the same was hanging by a rope. The dead body was then sent for postmortem. At about that time, the mother of the dead person filed a report with the Patwari, where it was stated that her son was assisting the appellant in relation to some work in the field of the appellant, where after, the mother of the deceased left for her parental home and, accordingly, she suspects that it was a case of homicide and, the appellant has committed the homicide. On the basis of this information, a first information report was registered and, the same was investigated upon, where after, a charge sheet was filed. At the trial, the mother and the sister of the deceased deposed that they suspect that it is the appellant, who has caused the death. The doctor who conducted postmortem, reported in the postmortem report that the deceased was 12 years old and, that the cause of death is by reason of asphyxia due to hanging. He recorded finding of contusion on front and left lateral aspect of neck and lacerated wound 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm in between the III and IV finger of left foot. After having had noticed such injuries as aforesaid, the conclusion of the doctor, which was supported by the prosecution, was that the death was by hanging. It came in the evidence of the mother of the deceased that she had seen the dead body suspended from a tree situate close to her house. Therefore, there cannot be any doubt that the case of the prosecution was that the death has taken place by hanging. There is no evidence that anyone far less the appellant, helped the deceased to hang. At the same time, there is no evidence that anyone far less the appellant, hanged the deceased. At the best, the evidence on record suggests a suspicion in the mind of the mother and the sister of the deceased that the appellant may have had caused the hanging. In the circumstances, the conclusion would be that there was no material on record on the basis whereof it could be concluded that the appellant had participated in the hanging of the deceased. The court below has not given any reason, which can be said to be reason in law, to support conviction of the appellant.
(2.) We, accordingly, allow the appeal and set aside the judgment and order under appeal. The appellant is on bail. Her bail bond is cancelled and sureties are discharged. She need not surrender. Let the copy of this order be sent to the lower court along with the lower court records.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.