A ‘confession’, life term, then freedom: 22 years after the murder of her husband and son, Meghalaya High Court acquits woman

“It is well settled that the prosecution must stand or fall on its own legs and it cannot derive any strength from the weakness of the defence,” the high court said in its March 18 order.

‘Circumstantial evidence incomplete’

• The death of the accused’s husband and son was homicidal and is not seriously disputed by the accused, the court observed.
• It is noted that none of the witnesses had last seen the accused with the husband and their two children.
• There is absolutely no evidence placed on record to show what happened inside the house and who was there in it.
• There is not a whisper about the children being injured or seen lying at the spot.
• The woman is acquitted of all charges against her, and the previous order of conviction is set aside.

Chief Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice W Diengdoh were hearing a plea challenging the August 2021 order of a trial court.

‘Confession suffers from serious infirmities’

• There is nothing to indicate from the confession so recorded that the accused was given any time to reflect as to whether she wanted to confess.
• The provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, pointing to the fact that the burden of proof of proving things which are in the special knowledge of a person is on that person, cannot be used to support a conviction unless the prosecution has proved all the elements necessary to establish the offence.
• The high court noted that the prosecution’s case rests mainly on a confession allegedly made by the accused herself, recorded by the magistrate.

Quarrel, assault

• According to the prosecution, the incident took place on March 28, 2003, at about 7.45 am, when the woman, after a quarrel with her husband, assaulted him and her son with a dao (machete-like tool), as a result of which, both succumbed to their injuries.
• The accused is also alleged to have assaulted her minor daughter, aged about two years and eight months, with the dao, after which, she is stated to have inflicted injuries on herself.
• Subsequently, the trial court framed charges against the woman for causing the death of her husband and son and for causing injuries to her daughter. The accused, however, pleaded not guilty to the same.
• Later, after hearing the parties, the trial court convicted the woman for the death of her husband but acquitted her of the offence under Section 302 for allegedly causing the death of her son.

Submission by parties

• Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocate S P Mahanta argued that the accused was not aware of the said confession allegedly made by her and learnt of the same only after the said order of conviction and sentence was passed.
• The conviction of the woman cannot be sustained in the absence of any evidence to connect her with the crime.
• He submitted that the prosecution’s case rests on circumstantial evidence and that they had miserably failed to prove any of the circumstances so relied upon, by legal, cogent and admissible evidence.
• He further submitted that the trial court convicted the appellant solely based on a confession allegedly made by the accused herself.
• Additional advocate general K Khan submitted that no interference was warranted in the trial court’s judgment and order, since the trial court had rightly convicted the accused after considering her confession recorded.
• He submitted that the confession so recorded by the magistrate suffers from no infirmities, since the magistrate was satisfied that her confession was made spontaneously by her, which reflects its voluntariness.