Calcutta HC Slams CWC for 'Bad & Illegal' Declaration of Child as 'Abandoned' Despite DNA Proof; Quashes Adoption Order, Mandates Fresh Inquiry With Biological Parents' Hearing 'Constitutional Rights Cannot Be Eclipsed By Parental Authority': Allahabad High Court Slaps ₹25 Lakh Compensation On Father And State For Unlawful Confinement Of Adult Women Over Voluntary Religious Conversion Co-Operative Bank Not Obligated To Deduct TDS On Interest Paid To Non-Member Co-Operative Societies Under Section 194A(3)(v) Income Tax Act: Bombay High Court Mere Pendency Of Criminal Cases Not Sufficient Ground For Externment; It Is An Extraordinary Measure To Be Used Sparingly: Karnataka High Court Good Conduct And Strength Of Character Always Lie In The Choices One Makes: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge Of RPF Constables For Suppressing Criminal Antecedents 'Time Is Of Extreme Essence': Supreme Court Declines To Interfere With Public Procurement Tenders Over Belated Challenge And Laches "'Hanging Is Not Cruel, Torturous Or Degrading': Supreme Court Upholds Validity Of Execution By Hanging Under CrPC & BNSS" 'Backdoor Entry Cannot Be Regularized By Judicial Sympathy': Supreme Court Quashes Illegal Absorptions And Repudiates Political Machinations In Public Employment Custodial Interrogation Indispensable In Cross-Border Drug Cases Involving Commercial Quantities, Denies Pre-Arrest Bail: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'Cannot Take Advantage Of Your Own Wrong': Delhi High Court Rejects Husband's Plea For Divorce After Defying Restitution Decree Spousal Privacy Is Not Absolute: Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules Secretly Recorded Audio Evidence Admissible To Prove Adultery 'No Premium, No Risk': Supreme Court Strictly Enforces Section 64VB Insurance Act, Striking Down Retrospective Covers 'An Appeal Is Not Just A Statutory Right, It Is A Constitutional Right': Supreme Court Scraps High Court's Suo Motu Enhancement Of Life Sentence Sale With Condition To Repurchase Is Not A Mortgage: Gujarat High Court Tax Is On Use, Not On Wreckage: Kerala High Court Quashes ₹10 Lakh Demand, Rules Motor Vehicle Tax Cannot Be Levied On Accident-Wrecked Vehicles Not In Use Pecuniary Jurisdiction Objections Cannot Be Raised For The First Time In Execution Proceedings: Madras High Court 'Cannot Proceed Under SARFAESI If Dues Below ₹20 Lakhs': Punjab & Haryana High Court Protects Homeowners From Eviction, Issues Notice

Medical Evidence Reveals One Child Died 13 Hours After Accused’s Rescue: Kerala High Court Acquits Mother Convicted of Killing Her Children

26 September 2024 12:51 PM

By: Deepak Kumar


Kerala High Court, in the case of Sindhu @ Kochuthressia v. State of Kerala, allowed the appeal of a mother convicted of murdering her two minor children, Sherin (7) and Antony Shown (4½), by throwing them into the Moolampilly River. The High Court overturned the life imprisonment sentence, acquitting the mother based on an incomplete chain of circumstantial evidence, lack of motive, and inconsistencies in medical findings.

The case originated from an incident on December 4, 2015, when Sindhu and her two children were reported missing after attending a church festival in Kadamakudy Village. She was later found alive in the river the next morning, and the bodies of her two children were recovered in the following days. The prosecution alleged that Sindhu, upset over family disputes, had murdered her children by throwing them into the river from a bridge. The trial court convicted her under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), sentencing her to life imprisonment.

The prosecution’s case was entirely based on circumstantial evidence, including the "last seen" theory, and invoked Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, shifting the burden of explanation onto the accused. The key legal questions were:

Whether the circumstantial evidence conclusively established the accused's guilt.

Whether the time and manner of death of the children corroborated the prosecution’s theory.

Whether the absence of a clear motive affected the credibility of the prosecution’s case.

The court emphasized that for circumstantial evidence to result in conviction, the evidence must form a complete chain that leads directly to the guilt of the accused. The prosecution failed to conclusively prove the chain of events, particularly due to discrepancies regarding the recovery of the children’s bodies from different locations and unexplained gaps in the timeline.

The postmortem reports indicated that one of the children, Antony Shown, died 13 hours after Sindhu was rescued from the river, which directly contradicted the prosecution's claim that both children were thrown into the river simultaneously. The medical evidence, which showed no signs of drowning until hours after Sindhu's rescue, heavily weighed against the prosecution's case.

"As per the medical evidence, Antony Shown was alive at least till 9:15 p.m. on 5.12.2015, while the accused was rescued from the river at 8 a.m. on the same day." – Para 45

The court found that the "last seen" theory, which suggested that the children were last seen with their mother, could not independently establish her guilt. Given the significant time gap between their disappearance and the discovery of their bodies, the court ruled that this theory was insufficient to sustain a conviction without corroborative evidence.

"Where the time gap is long, it would be unsafe to base the conviction solely on the 'last seen theory'." – Para 28

The prosecution had alleged that family disputes, particularly with the accused's mother-in-law, were the motive behind the crime. However, the court found no concrete evidence of such animosity, and emphasized that even if there was familial discord, it was not strong enough to justify such a heinous act as filicide.

"We cannot believe, even for a moment, that a mother for such a silly reason would throw her own children into the river and murder them." – Para 64

The court highlighted several critical lapses in the prosecution’s investigation. For instance, the prosecution failed to establish the exact location from which the children were thrown into the river. Moreover, key material evidence, such as the recovery of a pair of shoes and balloons from the alleged crime scene, was not adequately linked to the children.

"There is no evidence to show that MOs 1, 3, and 4 belonged to the children or the accused." – Para 43

The defense argued that after attending the church festival, the children went missing, and the accused was later found floating in the river. The court did not entirely dismiss this version, noting that the prosecution failed to disprove the possibility of an alternative sequence of events.

In light of the incomplete chain of circumstantial evidence, inconsistencies in medical reports, and the absence of a clear motive, the Kerala High Court held that the prosecution failed to prove Sindhu's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction and life sentence were set aside, and Sindhu was acquitted.

"The circumstances brought in evidence leave reasonable ground for the conclusion leading to the innocence of the accused." – Para 69

 

Date of Decision: 25 September 2024

Sindhu @ Kochuthressia v. State of Kerala

Latest Legal News