Chennai: The Madras high court has upheld an order of a trial court, which acquitted an accused, who allegedly killed his mother-in-law after she refused to sent his wife to the matrimonial home.
A division bench comprising Justices M.Sathyanarayanan and B.Pugalendhi dismissed the appeal filed by the state government, challenging an order of the sessions court in Thoothukudi district, acquitting Subbaiah alias Chinnaraj in the murder case.
The case of the prosecution was that Ellammal/defacto complai-nant, daughter of the deceased Subbulakshmi alias Subbammal (68), was the wife of the accused. Since there was a strained relationship between the couple, Ellammal left the matrimonial home and started living with her parents. On February 9, 2014, at about 9.20 pm, the accused came to their house and asked his wife to come with him. However the deceased Subbulakshmi refused to send her daughter along with him since the accused was in a drunken stage. Infuriated by the same, the accused allegedly used filthy languages and hurled bricks and tile pieces on the deceased, in which, the deceased sustained injuries and died on the spot. Based on a complaint given by the wife of the accused, a case was registered by the police. The trial judge, upon considering the oral and documentary evidence, has held that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and thereby acquitted the accused from the murder charge. Aggrieved, the state government has filed the present appeal.
Pointing out the principles governing the appeal against acquittal, as laid down by the Supreme Court, the bench said the defacto complainant was the wife of the accused and due to some matrimonial dispute, she started residing with her parents. On the fateful day, it was alleged that the accused came to the residence of the deceased and asked her to come along with him. Since the accused was in a drunken stage, the deceased refused to send her daughter along with the accused. Infuriated by the same, the accused hurled bricks on the deceased, in which, she sustained injuries and died on the spot. This version of the prosecution was supported by prosecution witess-1 (the complainant), when she was examined on January 18, 2016. However, when she was recalled and examined on March 4, 2016, she gave a different version that on hearing the news of her mother had fallen down, she went to the house and since the accused was disturbing them often, she had grudge against him and suspecting that he would have committed the offence, implicated him as accused and she did not witnessed the occurrence, the bench added.
The bench said the doctor, who conducted autopsy on the body of the deceased, noted down two injuries and has given his final opinion that the deceased appears to have died of Myocardial Ischemia (heart attack). Other than the two injuries noted down by the doctor, there was no injury on the body of the decease and according to the doctor, these two injuries were possible even if she fell down after suffering the heart attack, the bench added and dismissed the appeal.
