Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt.Geeta Bai vs The State Of M.P. on 24 October, 2024
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:55137
1 CRA-2045-2000
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE DEVNARAYAN MISHRA
ON THE 24th OF OCTOBER, 2024
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2045 of 2000
SMT.GEETA BAI
Versus
THE STATE OF M.P.
Appearance:
Shri Indra Mani Dubey - Advocate for the appellant.
Shri Arvind Kumar Singh - Government Advocate for the
respondent/State.
JUDGMENT
Per: Justice Vivek Agarwal This appeal has been preferred being aggrieved with the judgment dated 09.08.2000 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (NDPS) Act, Jabalpur in S.T. No.281/1999, by which the appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 and 201 of IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment and fine amount of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation of 6 months additional rigorous imprisonment.
2. In nutshell, the case of prosecution before the trial Court was that appellant was married with Mohan Soni, resident of village Devtal. After marriage, prior to 3-4 years of the incident, her husband Mohan Soni had kept another women as a concubine, so the appellant left her husband and Signature Not Verified Signed by: KUNDAN SHARMA Signing time: 11-11-2024 16:07:14 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:55137 2 CRA-2045-2000 was residing in her maternal home, where she conceived and on 07.01.1999, gave birth to a female child and to hide the birth of child, after smothering her, kept her body among the cow dung cakes in the Badi of Sanjay Dubey. The information was sent by a villager Parmanand (PW-5) on phone to police. After that police recorded the intimation as a Merg under Section 174 of Cr.P.C. Police visited the village and dead body was recovered, recovery memo (Ex.P/15) was prepared. The dead body of the child was sent for autopsy and the appellant was sent for medical examination. After medical examination, post-mortem, and recording the statement of witnesses, police station Bhedaghat, Jabalpur registered a crime No.39/1999 under Sections 316 and 318 of I.P.C. on 14.02.1999. Appellant was arrested on 17.02.1999.
After investigation, charge-sheet was filed before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jabalpur and after commitment, the case was submitted before the trial Court for trial.
3. The trail Court framed the charges under Sections 302, 201 in alternate Section 318 of the I.P.C. The appellant abjured the guilt and prayed for trial. The trial Court recorded the prosecution evidence and examined the appellant under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. She has submitted that though her husband had concubine but, she was having relation with her husband. She has not committed any offence. She has been falsely implicated. She has not examined any defence witness.
4. The trail Court after hearing the parties convicted the appellant as stated in para No.1.
5. Shri Indramani Dubey, learned counsel, for the appellant has Signature Not Verified Signed by: KUNDAN SHARMA Signing time: 11-11-2024 16:07:14 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:55137 3 CRA-2045-2000 submitted that the prosecution failed to establish the relation of the dead body of the child with the appellant as no identification by DNA examination was conducted, a dead child was born. The appellant has not murdered her daughter. The appellant herself became unconscious by pre- mature delivery but, the trial Court has not considered all these aspects.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the conviction has solely based on the opinion of Dr. Smt. S. Trivedi (PW-1) and Dr. Mukesh Shrivastava (PW-6). No villager has told him that she has conceived or alive child has born to her. He has further submitted that the case of murder is not proved. Hence, the appellant be acquitted.
7. Learned Public Prosecutor, Shri Arvind Singh has submitted that Dr. S.Trivedi (PW-1) has clearly stated that she has delivered the child and futhermore the villagers and even her brother have clearly stated that her sister has given birth of a female child and that child was found dead. Dr. Mukesh Shrivastava has clearly stated that a living child was born and was killed by smothering and the independent witnesses of the same village have supported the prosecution case. Therefore, no interference in the judgment of the trial Court is called for. Hence, the appeal be dismissed.
8. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Witness Rambalak (PW-2) has stated that on 07.01.1999, he was in night duty as Head Moharre in police station Bhedaghat. Head constable No. 430, Ravi Shankar submitted a merg intimation, in which, it was written that a new baby was born to appellant on 07.01.1999 at 01:30 P.M. and was killed by her mother by smothering and dead body of the child was Signature Not Verified Signed by: KUNDAN SHARMA Signing time: 11-11-2024 16:07:14 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:55137 4 CRA-2045-2000 concealed among the cow dung cakes, on that basis he registered Merg No.03/1999, these are respectively Ex.P/2 and 3.
9. Janki Bai (PW-3) has stated that the appellant is her sister-in-law (nanad). The appellant was married 12 years prior with Mohan, resident of village Devtal, Jabalpur and three children were born to her from that wedlock. For the last four to five years, she was residing in her parental home. Her husband has kept another woman, one year prior to date of statement, she has given birth to a female child. That child was born in Badi of the Sanju Maharaj also called Sanjay Dubey. The baby was born while she went to prepare cow dung cake and the baby was died. Chhedilal (PW-4) has also supported the same fact. The father of the appellant has stated the same fact. This witness has also clearly stated that a female baby was born to appellant in Sanju Maharaj Badi and when he went in the Badi of Sanju Maharaj, he found that a dead body of the female child was laying.
10. Parmanad (PW-5), who has informed the police on the phone has stated that the appellant was already married. This witness has stated that he got the information that near the school, in the Sanjay Dubey Badi, a corpus of female child was laying and he has informed the police. The police reached on the spot and he went on the spot along with police. Rokad Singh (PW-7) has also supported the fact that Geeta Bai has given birth to a child, while she went to answer the call of nature. Om Prakash (PW-8) village kotwar has also supported the said fact that a dead body of a female child was found laying in the outside the village. Police called and by issuing notice, a panchnama was prepared. The dead body of the baby was recovered Signature Not Verified Signed by: KUNDAN SHARMA Signing time: 11-11-2024 16:07:14 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:55137 5 CRA-2045-2000 by the police. Ramcharan (PW-9) has also supported the fact that the dead body of a female child was recovered from the Badi and inquest report of the dead body was prepared. The appellant was sent for medical examination. Kishori Lal (PW-10) has also supported the fact that panchnama of dead body of a baby was prepared in the Badi of Sanjay Dubey and police prepared the panchnama (Ex.P/5).
11. Maina Bai (PW-12), who is the resident of same village has stated that she is acquainted with the appellant. The place of spot, Badi of Sanjay Dubey is situated near her father's home. Approximately near Sankrani in the month of January at 02:00 P.M., she was at home and went to throw the garbage out of her home, where the appellant met her in the Badi. She was near the cow dung cakes. She was wearing a petticoat, blouse and a sari was laying there. When she asked the appellant why she was sitting there, the appellant stated that she is suffering from fever and she is feeling dizziness and not in a position to move her home. She went near the appellant and found that a new born baby was laying in front of the appellant. She asked why she is sitting there and after that she returned to her home. These facts were not challenged by the defence in the cross-examination.
12. Thus, from the evidence, it is clear that on the date of incident the appellant has given birth to a child and the child was laying near her in Sanjay Dubey Badi and the child was dead. The police was informed and the police went on the spot, dead body was recovered and the appellant was sent for medical examination and Merg was registered.
13. A.K. Dwivedi (PW-11) Investigation Officer has stated that on Signature Not Verified Signed by: KUNDAN SHARMA Signing time: 11-11-2024 16:07:14 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:55137 6 CRA-2045-2000 07.01.1999 after getting the information, he entered the intimation in general diary Entry No.226 at 16:40. P.M. The entry (Ex.P/20) in copy 2023 and after entry of the G.D. (rojnamcha), he went to the spot along with Ravishankar (Constable No. 430) and Shiv Prasad (Constable No.472) to village Lohari. He visited the spot, prepared the spot map (Ex.P/13). He inquird the appellant and prepared memorandum (Ex.P/14) and on the intimation of the appellant, the dead body of the child was recovered and inquest report was prepared and the dead body was sent for postmortem through constable Shiv Prasad (Constable No.472), who recorded the statements of the prosecution witnesses. He send the appellant to be examined by Medical Officer on 08.01.1999. After postmortem, Crime No.39/1999 was registered and in the cross-examination no substantial question has been asked by which the conduct of the Investigation Officer became suspicious.
14. Dr. Mukesh Shrivastava (PW-6) has clearly stated that on 08.01.1999, the dead body of the baby was brought by Shiv Prasad (Constable No.472) P.S. Bhedaghat. The body was of a new born female child. Umbilical cord and placenta were attached with the dead body of the child. Meconium was found in the dead body. Apparently, the deficiency of hemoglobin was found in the blood. Multiple abrasions were found in the mouth and chicks of the baby. After dissection both lungs were taken out.
Hydrostatic test was performed and doctor opined that the child has born alive and doctor had opined that the child died due to asphyxia that was caused by smothering. He had prepared the postmortem report (Ex.P/11).
Signature Not Verified Signed by: KUNDAN SHARMA Signing time: 11-11-2024 16:07:14NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:55137 7 CRA-2045-2000
15. Dr. Smt. S. Trivedi (PW-1) has stated that she has conducted the medical examination of the appellant on 08.10.1999 at 07:00 P.M. and after examining pulse, blood pressure, abdomen, uterus and private parts of the appellant, she found that she has given a birth to a child within 36 hours.
16. Thus, from the above discussion, it is clear that the appellant on 07.01.1999 had given birth to a female baby alive and female baby died due to smothering by the appellant and none was present at the place where she was found. Why she was sitting and she has not given the explanation how she went on the place that was lonely and why she has not informed about the birth of a child to the person of her family or neighbour. It is also clear from the medical evidence that child was smothered and murdered and appellant has not stated that any other person has committed the murder of the new born child or by accidently the child died.
17. Looking to the facts and circumstances and the evidence by the prosecution, the conclusion of the trial Court cannot be said to be perverse or without evidence. The trial Court has convicted the appellant under Section 302, Section 299 of the IPC. Explanation No.3 is as under:-
"The causing of the death of child in the mother's womb is not homicidal. But it may amount to culpable homicide to cause the death of a living child, if any part of that child has been brought forth, though the child may not have breathed or been completely born."
18. Thus, from the evidence of the Medical officer Dr. Mukesh Shrivastava (PW-6), it is clear that female child was born to the appellant Signature Not Verified Signed by: KUNDAN SHARMA Signing time: 11-11-2024 16:07:14 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2024:MPHC-JBP:55137 8 CRA-2045-2000 and was smothered after birth, thus, the act of the appellant comes under the culpable homicide and the act was intentional, hence, it qualifies the definition of Section 300 and minimum punishment for committing murder under Section 302 is the life imprisonment with fine and the trial Court has imposed the minimum sentence. Hence, the conviction and sentence of the appellant is affirmed. The appeal being devoid of merits is dismissed.
19. The bail bonds of the appellant are cancelled. She will surrender before the trial Court to serve the remaining jail sentence otherwise, the trial Court make arrested the appellant and send to judicial custody for serving the remaining jail sentence.
20. The case property is disposed off so far as the judgment of the trial Court.
21. The copy of the judgment and the record of the trial Court be returned immediately.
22. The record of the appeal be consigned to record room.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) (DEVNARAYAN MISHRA)
JUDGE JUDGE
K.S.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: KUNDAN
SHARMA
Signing time: 11-11-2024
16:07:14