New Delhi: A woman living in a remote village in Chhattisgarh killed her two daughters, aged five and three years, with an iron rod. After the murder, she kept crying continuously. She told the court that she was under the influence of 'invisible powers' while committing the crime. Both the lower court and the High Court found her guilty of murder and sentenced her to life imprisonment. However, now the woman has got a big relief from the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and NK Singh said that the influence of 'invisible powers' can be a temporary mental state. The court therefore changed her sentence to culpable homicide under Section 304 Part II of the IPC. The bench ordered her release after she had been in jail for nearly 10 years.
The court said she had spoken of Mata, Buddhi Dai etc. 15 days before the incident. She was also taken to a hospital for consultation with a psychiatrist. Justice Singh said that in rural areas, where superstition runs deep and mental problems are often confused with control of 'invisible powers', it is possible that she had a sudden attack of mental disorder leading to the murder.
The SC bench said that if there were no reasons prompting her to commit such a horrific crime, it is beyond comprehension how a mother who loved her children and had cordial relations with her husband could become so violent. How can she be charged with 'intent to cause death' of her beloved children except that she had come under some influence or forces which were beyond her control, as she claimed.
The court also said that it is not common for rural people to be aware of various mental disorders/illnesses such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, which can temporarily deteriorate a person's mental state. Often, these disorders are not recognised and treated as the symptoms may be difficult to identify. People do not seek proper and timely medical help, which may result in medical/mental conditions that may be misunderstood or confused with the influence of invisible forces based on superstitions.
The SC bench said that the circumstances are sufficient to raise doubts about the appellant's intent to commit the crime. We are therefore satisfied that in the present case, 'intention to cause death' has not been proved. The court convicted him for the lesser offence under Section 304-II of the IPC.
