Ruling By Madras High Court in Case Involving Woman Accused of Murdering Husband Who Attempted to Sexually Assault Daughter

(Judicial Quest News Network)

21, August,2024

The Madras High Court recently overturned a murder charge against a woman who killed her husband in a defensive act after he, in a state of intoxication, attempted to sexually assault their 21-year-old daughter.

Justice J. Jayachandran, in his ruling, emphasized that the evidence on record, including photographs and the postmortem report submitted by the prosecution, substantiated the defense raised by the accused woman (petitioner) and the testimony of her daughter.

The Court noted the semi-nude condition of the deceased and the head injury indicating a fractured skull, which aligned with the petitioner’s account and the daughter’s statement. The evidence demonstrated that the deceased was found in an inappropriate position over his daughter and was actively attempting to gag her. The petitioner initially used a wooden knife to intervene, and when this failed, she resorted to a hammer to prevent further assault, resulting in the deceased’s immediate death.

The petitioner argued that her actions constituted a clear case of private defense under Section 97 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which allows for self-defense and defense of others. The Court agreed, noting that Section 97 IPC permits defensive actions to protect oneself or others from sexual offenses. Therefore, prosecuting her under Section 302 IPC for murder was deemed unjustified.

The Court, considering the general exceptions outlined in Section 97 IPC, determined that the petitioner was entitled to protection under this section. It referred to the statements and evidence presented, including the injury on the deceased’s head, and concluded that this case merited judicial intervention.

Consequently, the Court allowed the petition and quashed the criminal case against the woman. No representation was made on behalf of the petitioner, while Government Advocate S. Uday Kumar appeared for the respondent.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *