Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Accused Not Entitled To Copies Of 'Unrelied' Upon Documents At The Stage Of Framing Of Charges Under Section 91 CrPC: Supreme Court Elected Representatives Have No Privilege To Resort To Violence; Criminal Antecedents Are Material For Bail Adjudication: Supreme Court Mere Absence Of Transport Documents Does Not Create A Presumption Of Violation Of Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004: Supreme Court Section 396 IPC | Conviction For 'Dacoity With Murder' Requires Proof That Murder Was Committed In The Course Of Dacoity: Allahabad High Court 'Developers Cannot Delay Conveyance For Eternity And Milk Additional FSI Benefits': Bombay High Court Upholds Societies' Deemed Conveyance Pre-Approval Statutory Dues Stand Extinguished Upon Approval Of Resolution Plan; GST Authorities Cannot Initiate Fresh Proceedings: Calcutta High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell With Delivery Of Possession Is Admissible In A Suit For Specific Performance: Delhi High Court Stigmatic Order Discharging Probationer Without Inquiry Is Void For Violation Of Natural Justice: Gujarat High Court Execution Proceedings | Court Cannot Impose Arbitrary Financial Conditions Without Reason In Stay Applications: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 528 BNSS | High Court Cannot Exercise Inherent Powers To Circumvent Statutory Bar Against Second Revision: Delhi High Court Advocate Empanelment | Restriction On Multiple Applications Is A Procedural Choice Within Employer’s Domain: Delhi High Court Acquittal Appeal | Double Presumption Of Innocence In Favour Of Accused Cannot Be Disturbed Merely Because Another View Is Possible: Gujarat High Court SC/ST Act | Offence Under Section 3(1)(g) Not Attracted If Dispossession Or Interference Is Not Due To Victim's Caste: Himachal Pradesh High Court Judicial Officer Must Maintain Distance From Practicing Advocates To Avoid Impropriety: Gujarat High Court Upholds Dismissal Section 183 BNSS | Investigating Officer Cannot Independently Record Further Statement Of Victim After Recording Before Magistrate: Karnataka High Court Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

 Supreme Court Grants Premature Release to Mother Convicted of Murdering Children

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 4 May 2023, Supreme Court granted premature release to Nagarathinam, a mother who was convicted of murdering her two children by administering poison. The judgment addressed both the appellant's request for conversion of her conviction and the rejection of her application for premature release.

The appellant had been in a relationship with a man named Suresh, who frequently threatened her. Fearing for her and her children's lives, Nagarathinam made the devastating decision to commit suicide along with her twin sons, Ramar and Laxmanan. She administered poison to her children, and when she attempted to consume it herself, her niece intervened, preventing further harm. Tragically, the two children died upon arrival at the hospital.

Initially, the appellant was convicted by the trial court under Sections 302 and 309 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, the High Court upheld the conviction under Section 302 but acquitted her under Section 309. Dissatisfied with the verdict, Nagarathinam approached the Supreme Court.

During the proceedings, the appellant's counsel argued that her actions fell under Exception 1 to Section 300 of the IPC, which deals with culpable homicide not amounting to murder. They contended that Nagarathinam was under sudden provocation and that her extreme decision to commit family suicide should be considered an extenuating circumstance. Furthermore, they invoked two precedents from the Madras High Court to support their case.

However, the Supreme Court, after a detailed analysis of the facts and relevant provisions of the IPC, held that the appellant's actions did not fall within the exceptions provided in Section 300. Consequently, the Court refused to convert the conviction from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

Turning to the issue of premature release, the Court noted that the appellant had already served nearly 20 years in prison and had applied for early release. The State Level Committee, after considering her conduct and prolonged incarceration, had recommended her release. However, the State of Tamil Nadu rejected this recommendation, citing the cruel and brutal nature of the offense.

The Supreme Court observed that while the crime committed by Nagarathinam was undoubtedly grave, her intention was not to murder her children but to end her own life. The Court opined that the rejection of premature release was unjustified, considering her suffering and undisputed reflective conduct. Accordingly, the Court set aside the State's order and directed the immediate release of the appellant.

 4 May 2023

NAGARATHINAM vs STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE   

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/04-May-2023-NAGARATHINAM-Vs-State.pdf"]

Latest Legal News