In a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of India, the case of the baby girl’s death has reached a conclusion. The court acquitted the accused in the matter, emphasizing the need for concrete evidence in criminal proceedings. This ruling sets a precedent for future cases regarding circumstantial evidence and the burden of proof. Stay tuned for more updates on this significant legal development.
Facts
- The appellant was admitted in the maternity ward of Lady Hardinge Medical College Hospital and delivered a baby girl on 24 August 2007.
- A case was registered against the appellant on 31 August 2007 under Section 302 IPC for causing the death of her newborn baby, a girl.
- The post-mortem conducted on the dead body on 26 August 2007 revealed that the cause of death was asphyxia due to ante-mortem strangulation.
- The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed trial in the case.
- Prosecution examined 23 witnesses to prove the charge against the appellant.
- The Additional Sessions Judge at New Delhi tried the appellant in Sessions Case No.78 of 2009 for the offence under Section 302 IPC.
- The High Court of Delhi at New Delhi convicted and sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 IPC in Criminal Appeal No.168 of 2010.
- The accused was presented with the evidence against her
- Her statement was recorded under Section 313, Cr.P.C.
- She pleaded her innocence and claimed to be falsely implicated by the police in collaboration with the hospital authorities
- The trial court found the prosecution’s evidence strong and convicted the accused under Section 302 IPC
- The trial court imposed a sentence of life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2000
- The accused appealed to the High Court against the conviction and sentence
- The High Court upheld the lower court’s decision and confirmed the conviction and sentence
Also Read: State of Madhya Pradesh v. Udham and Others – Legal Judgment Summary
Arguments
- The counsel for the appellant argued that there are no eye witnesses to the incident.
- The incident occurred in the hospital ward during delivery.
- The appellant’s conviction is based on circumstantial evidence.
- The chain of circumstances leading to the conviction is deemed incomplete.
- It is pointed out that the appellant had no motive to harm her newborn baby girl as she already had a male child and her in-laws had passed away.
- Appellant-mother was sleepy due to drugs administered and upon seeing the child, found the newborn dead.
- Error in convicting the appellant without proving chain of circumstances leading to her conviction.
- Judgments of trial court and High Court based on surmises and conjectures.
- Newborn was kept in an incubator until 4:30 p.m. and then handed over to the appellant.
- Incident occurred on 24th August 2007, post-mortem conducted on 26th August, and crime registered on 27th August 2007.
- Oral evidence from PW-8 and PW-9 establishes the newborn was in an incubator with an oxygen mask.
Also Read: Legal Analysis on Deemed Tenancy of Evacuee Property
Analysis
- The appellant was convicted based on circumstantial evidence and an attributed motive of killing the baby girl.
- There is no clear evidence to support the conclusion that the appellant had a motive to kill her baby girl.
- The appellant already had a male child and desired a female child to complete the family, as evidenced by the testimony of witnesses.
- The conviction was based on the testimony of staff nurses who placed the baby with the mother at a certain time and found the baby dead later.
- The husband of the appellant, a key witness, mentioned the events surrounding the birth and death of the baby.
- The trial court and high court based the conviction on presumptions without a solid basis.
- No motive was established for the appellant to kill her baby as a female child.
- There were discrepancies in the timeline of events leading up to the baby’s death and the postmortem report.
- The crime against the appellant was registered several days after the incident occurred.
- The post-mortem report mentioned death by asphyxia and marks of strangulation, but the motive for the mother to kill her baby in such a manner was deemed unnatural.
- The baby girl was put in an incubator with an oxygen mask and did not cry after birth.
- There was a possibility of natural death.
- Post-mortem report stated the cause of death as asphyxia, but there is no clear evidence to convict the appellant under Section 302 IPC.
- Insufficient evidence on record to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
- The appellant is entitled to the benefit of doubt and is acquitted from the charge.
- The criminal appeal is allowed based on the lack of conclusive evidence.
Also Read: Fidelity Insurance Claim Dispute: Collateral Management Co. vs. Insurance Company
Decision
- The appellant’s bail bonds are cancelled as she has been acquitted of the charges against her
- The judgment of the trial court dated 19.12.2009 has been set aside
- The impugned judgment of the High Court dated 12.03.2010 in Criminal Appeal No 168 of 2010 has also been set aside
- Consequently, the appellant is acquitted of the charge framed against her
Case Title: MANJU Vs. THE STATE OF DELHI
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-001268-001268 / 2013
