In Suman Devi vs. The State of Bihar (2025), Patna High Court's Division Bench of Justices Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Sourendra Pandey delivered a 25-page long judgement dated October 17, 2025, wherein, it directed: ''50. The appellant, namely, Suman Devi, is directed to be released from jail forthwith, if not required or detained in any other case.''
Justice Pandey observed;.''...it would be evident that from the evidence which has been led by the prosecution, we do not find that the death was caused with pre-motivation. We have seen that there was no weapon used by the accused/appellant in committing the crime and even the injuries received by the deceased do not go on to show/prove that they would have ordinarily cause death of a person. The intention/knowledge of the accused while inflicting the injuries, which were found on the body of the deceased, are also not being proved rather the deposition of P.W. 2, the father of the deceased and the husband of the accused/appellant, ratifies the same, wherein, he has stated that his wife on being asked as to why she did it, she stated that it was done accidentally and she had not thought he would die.''
He added:''We have also seen that there was no motive as also any kind of quarrel or dispute between the accused/appellant and her in-laws. This Court has observed that the occurrence had taken place in broad day light in presence of P.W. 6, the mother of the deceased, and the conduct and behaviour of the accused/appellant after the incident, wherein, she had brought the body of the deceased out of the room, laid it on the cot and stayed there and did not make any attempt to flee. 45. The conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC is, thus, altered to one under Section 304 Part-I. 46. It appears from the case records that the appellant is in custody since 03.10.2020 and has, thus, spent about five years in jail by now. Mr. Katriar, learned counsel for the appellant, has stated that the appellant has a young child, who too is with her in jail. 47. We have also given our anxious consideration on the fact that the appellant never intended to cause death; or that she only wanted to secure the well being and happiness of her stepson and as such, the appellant needs to be dealt with leniently. 48. For the reasons afore-noted, this Court deem it appropriate and believe that the interest of justice would be met if the sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period of custody which she has already undergone.
The appeal arose out of the judgment of conviction dated November 3, 2022 and the order of sentence dated November 10, 2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Banka (Bihar) in connection with Sessions Trial No. 249 of 2021, which arose out of Amarpur P.S. Case No. 598 of 2020. By the impugned judgment, the appellant was convicted for the offences under Sections 302, 323 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine, to also suffer simple imprisonment of one week for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment of one month each for the offences under Sections 323 and 341 of the IPC.
The prosecution case was based on the written application dated October 2, 2020 given by the informant (P.W. 2). In his written report, the informant stated that on October 2, 2020 at around 14:00 hours, when he was working at the poultry-farm of his village, one Dhananjay Tanti informed him that his 7 years old son, namely, Sohit Kumar is lying in an unconscious state and is unable to breathe. It is further alleged that when he reached to his home, he found his son dead. Thereafter, the father and the mother of respectively, told the informant that his wife, Suman Devi (appellant), has killed his son by suffocating him. On the basis of the written application, Amarpur P.S. Case No. 598 of 2020, dated October 2, 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Section 302 of the IPC.
No comments:
Post a Comment