Prosecution Fails to Prove Intent to Murder Under Section 302 IPC: Kerala High Court Alters Conviction to Culpable Homicide

Kerala High Court, in Rani vs. State of Kerala, modified the conviction of Rani and two co-accused from murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC. The case involved the murder of a 4-year-old girl, X, by her mother and two co-accused. The Court also quashed the convictions under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, due to insufficient evidence of sexual assault.

The prosecution alleged that Rani, along with two accomplices (A1 and A3), conspired to murder her daughter, X, viewing the child as an impediment to their illicit lifestyle. X was last seen with A3 on October 29, 2013, and her body was exhumed the next day from a property after Rani filed a misleading missing persons report. The accused were convicted under Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy), 302 (murder), and 201 (destruction of evidence) of the IPC, along with charges under the POCSO Act and Juvenile Justice Act.

Murder or Culpable Homicide: The Court scrutinized the nature of injuries inflicted on X. Forensic evidence (PW19) indicated that injury No. 25 was fatal, but did not conclusively prove an intent to kill under Section 300 IPC. Instead, the injuries pointed to culpable homicide under Section 304 Part I IPC. The Court concluded that the prosecution failed to prove the intent to murder required for a conviction under Section 302 IPC.

Circumstantial Evidence and Last Seen Theory: The case heavily relied on circumstantial evidence, including the "last seen" theory, where A3 was last seen with X. Although the time gap between the last sighting and recovery of the body was significant, other evidence, such as recovery of the body based on disclosure statements, supported the conviction. The Court cautioned against over-reliance on the "last seen" theory but found it sufficient when combined with other evidence.

Sexual Assault Charges under the POCSO Act: The trial court had convicted A1 under Section 10 of the POCSO Act based on presumptions under Sections 29 and 30 of the Act. However, forensic evidence (PW19) did not confirm any penetrative sexual assault. The High Court ruled that the presumption under the POCSO Act did not apply, as the prosecution failed to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the conviction under the POCSO Act was set aside.

Criminal Conspiracy: Call records and witness testimonies established that Rani, A1, and A3 had conspired to eliminate X. The Court upheld the conviction for conspiracy under Section 120B IPC, as the evidence demonstrated a clear premeditated plan to murder the child.

The High Court altered the conviction from murder (Section 302 IPC) to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (Section 304 Part I IPC), imposing a life sentence along with fines. The Court quashed the convictions under the POCSO Act and Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act, but upheld the charges of conspiracy under Section 120B IPC.

The Kerala High Court provided relief to the appellants by reducing their conviction from murder to culpable homicide but sustained the conspiracy charge. The acquittal under the POCSO Act emphasizes the need for robust evidence to secure convictions in cases involving child sexual abuse.

Date of Decision: September 13, 2024