Madras High Court
Mrs.Gowri vs State Represented By on 22 November, 2023
Author: S.S.Sundar
Bench: S.S.Sundar
Crl.M.P.No.13348 of 2023 in Crl.A.No.927 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 22.11.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN
Crl.M.P.No.13348 of 2023
in Crl.A.No.927 of 2023
Mrs.Gowri
W/o Raji .. Petitioner
-vs-
1. State represented by
Inspector of Police
Pattabiram Police Station
Tiruvallur
(Crime No.96 of 2016) .. Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 389(1) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure to suspend the sentence of imprisonment
passed by the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur
dated 27.09.2019 in Sessions Case No.272 of 2016 and enlarge the
petitioner on bail, pending disposal of the appeal.
For Petitioner :: Mr.S.Kingston Jerold
For Respondents :: Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan
Additional Public Prosecutor
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No.1/7
Crl.M.P.No.13348 of 2023 in Crl.A.No.927 of 2023
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by SUNDER MOHAN, J.)
The petitioner, who is the sole accused in S.C.No.272 of 2016 on the
file of the learned I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur, stands
convicted for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to
undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in
default to undergo simple imprisonment for four months vide the judgment
dated 27.09.2019 passed by the trial Court. Challenging the said conviction
and sentence, the petitioner has filed the above appeal. The present
miscellaneous petition has been filed to suspend the sentence and enlarge
her on bail, pending the above appeal.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused is the wife of the
deceased; that she got married to the deceased 1 ½ years prior to the
occurrence and they had a male child by name Aakash; that the deceased
always suspected the fidelity of the accused, as the male child was born
within six months of marriage, and it was his habit to come home in an
inebriated condition and always harassed and beaten the accused; that on
13.02.2016, the deceased came home in an inebriated condition and beat
and kicked the accused in the stomach and thereafter, while he was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.13348 of 2023 in Crl.A.No.927 of 2023
sleeping, the accused had caused his death by throwing a grinding stone on
his head and thereafter locked and left the house by 6.00 P.M., on the same
day and stayed with her mother-in-law, P.W.1; that when P.W.1 asked the
accused as to why she came to her house, the accused is said to have stated
to P.W.1 that the deceased was beating her and therefore she was frightened
to stay with him or alone in the house.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the
case is based on circumstantial evidence and that the prosecution had not
established the circumstances conclusively. The learned counsel, pointing
out the evidence of witnesses, submitted that the prosecution has not
established the chain of circumstances and that in any case, the
circumstances do not point to the guilt of the accused. The learned counsel
further submitted that the accused is in confinement since 2019 and has to
take care of her child, who is aged less than five years.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, per contra, submitted
that the motive has been established with the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3, the
mother, sister and niece of the deceased and also through the evidence of
P.W.4, a neighbour. The occurrence took place in the house where the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.13348 of 2023 in Crl.A.No.927 of 2023
accused and the deceased lived together. The conduct of the accused in not
attending her husband's funeral and other circumstances prove the guilt of
the petitioner and there is no infirmity in the finding of the trial Court.
Hence, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor prayed for dismissal of the
petition for suspension of sentence.
5. We have carefully considered the submissions and perused the
records. Admittedly, the deceased used to quarrel frequently with the
accused. Even on the day of occurrence, he is said to have beaten the
accused suspecting her fidelity. It is also the case of the prosecution that
she immediately went and stayed with her mother-in-law (mother of the
deceased). It is the further case of the prosecution that none of them visited
the house of occurrence for nearly two days. On 15.02.2016, P.W.1 went to
the house of the deceased and found her son lying dead on the floor and that
the body was in a decomposed state. There is no explanation by the
prosecution as to why none of them went to the house for nearly two days,
though it is admitted by P.W.1 that the accused came to her house even as
early as on 13.02.2016. Apart from the conduct viz., that the accused did
not attend the funeral of the deceased and the fact that they were living
together and they had frequent quarrels, the prosecution has not established
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.13348 of 2023 in Crl.A.No.927 of 2023
any other circumstance. Therefore, we are of the view that the prosecution
has not proved all the links in the chain of circumstances which would point
only to the guilt of the petitioner and ruling out any other hypothesis.
Considering the fact that the petitioner, a lady, is in confinement from 27th
September, 2019 and the appeal is not likely to be taken up in the near
future, we are inclined to suspend the sentence.
6. Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition stands allowed
and the substantive sentence of imprisonment imposed on the petitioner is
suspended and she is granted bail on the following conditions:-
(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees
twenty five thousand only) with two sureties, of whom one should be
a blood relative, each for a likesum, to the satisfaction of the learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur.
(ii)The sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression
in the surety bond and the learned Magistrate may obtain a copy of
their Aadhar card or Bank Pass Book and mobile numbers to ensure
their identity; and
(iii)The petitioner shall appear before the trial Court on the first working
day of every month at 10.30 a.m., until the disposal of the appeal and
if she is not able to appear before the trial Court on any day, she shall
make arrangements to file an application under Section 317 Cr.P.C.
and shall appear before the trial Court on any other day in lieu of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.13348 of 2023 in Crl.A.No.927 of 2023
date of her absence, as directed by the trial Court.
(S.S.S.R.,J.) (S.M.,J.)
22.11.2023
ss
To
1. The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Tiruvallur
2. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruvallur
3. The Inspector of Police, Pattabiram Police Station, Tiruvallur
4. The Superintendent, Special Prison for Women, Puzhal, Chennai
5. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.13348 of 2023 in Crl.A.No.927 of 2023
S.S.SUNDAR, J.
AND
SUNDER MOHAN, J.
ss
22.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
