2013 Adhithi Murder Case: Kerala High Court Sentences Father, Step-Mother To Life Imprisonment For 6-Yr-Old's Death

The Sessions Court had sentenced the two accused persons only for the lesser offences under Sections 323 and 324 r/w Section 34 of the IPC and also under Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice Act.

Division Bench of Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V. and Justice K.V. Jayakumar set aside the finding of acquittal by the Sessions Court for the offence under Section 302 IPC. It observed,

“On a careful evaluation, scrutiny, weighing and testing of the prosecution evidence, both oral and documentary, we are of the considered opinion that the evidence adduced by the prosecution is sufficient to prove the homicidal death of the victim, Adhithi, by the accused. However, the learned Sessions Judge, while appreciating the evidence, has failed to consider the medical evidence in its correct perspective… The totality of evidence unmistakably points to the existence of a shared intention and a concerted course of conduct resulting in the death of the child, thereby fully attracting the provisions of Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC.”

After hearing the accused in person regarding sentencing, they were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. It refused to impose death penalty and found that there for no special reasons to do so.

The prosecution allegation in the case was that the accused persons, who were the father and step mother of the deceased girl child, had caused her death by subjecting her to cruelty by physically abusing her and not providing her with food or medical attention.

They were accused under Sections 323, 324, 307, 302 r/w 34 IPC and under Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.

It was alleged that the deceased and her brother (PW1) were made to suffer continuous cruelty and harassment at the hands of the accused for a prolonged period. At this time, the deceased and PW1 were 5 ½ years and 10 years old respectively.

The defence version was that the victim died of epilepsy.

PW1 testified that the accused used to hit them with a wooden reaper, kick them, and subject them to starvation. They also caused fracture of the deceased's hands, forced her to drink hot barley water, poured boiled water on her private parts and denied medical treatment, resulting in her death.

He also testified that the victim was beaten with the wooden reaper on the day of the incident and thereafter, she went to lie down. Later, she was moved to another room and when he called her during dinner at around 10 p.m., she did not come. The accused then went to the room and when she did not respond, she was taken to the hospital.

A week after the victim died, PW1 was taken for a medical examination and PW1 Assistant Surgeon have a wound certificate noting multiple scars on his body.

Considering the evidence, the Court opined:

“The evidence of PW1 (Arun S. Namboodiri), taken together with the evidence of PW11 (Dr. Ambili Aravind), clearly depicts the true extent of the inhuman, sadistic, and demonic torture to which the young children were subjected. The evidence of PW1 appears to be natural, truthful and inspires the confidence of this Court. Indeed, he is the best person to speak about the incident which occurred inside the four walls of the house, maintaining strict secrecy.”

Next, the Court examined the medical evidence given by the doctor who conducted the autopsy of the deceased child, which had given an opinion that the child died of neurogenic shock due to pain due to blunt trauma to back of abdomen and flanks, prolonged ill treatment, neglect and manual labour.

The neighbours and relatives of the accused also testified stating that the accused used to treat the children cruelly and would not let anyone, including Childline, into the house by unleashing their dogs on them. The Court opined that the same was sufficient to corroborate the evidence given by PW1.

On appreciating the evidence, the Court found the accused to be guilty of thirdly clause of Section 300 IPC. It observed:

“applying the law laid down by the Apex Court in Virsa Singh (supra), we hold that the present case falls within the “thirdly” clause of Section 300 IPC. In such circumstances, it is immaterial whether the offender had the direct intention to cause the death of the victim.”

Relying on various decision, the Court also came to the conclusion that it can interfere with a finding of acquittal since the decision of the Sessions Court was wholly perverse, contrary to the weight of evidence and unsustainable in law. It found that the Sessions Court's finding that there was no intention to cause death to be incorrect.

It also remarked that the defence's version that the child died due to epilepsy was contrary to medical and circumstantial evidence. It felt that the accused had a duty to give a reasonable explanation for her death.

The Court further observed:

“In such circumstances, the accused were under a duty, as contemplated under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to offer a reasonable and credible explanation regarding the cause of death. No plausible or satisfactory explanation has been offered by the appellants in this regard, which further reinforces the inference of guilt drawn from the prosecution evidence.”

Thus, the Court allowed the appeal and reversed the finding of acquittal for the offences under Section 300 IPC read with Section 34. It imposed life imprisonment for the offence and a fine of Rs. 2 lakhs.

It also confirmed the Sessions Court's finding of guilt for the offences under Sections 323 and 324 r/w. Section 34 IPC and under Section 23 JJ Act. Further, the order of acquittal for offence under Section 307 IPC was also upheld.

Further, it was clarified that the sentences are to run concurrently.

Case No: Crl.A. No. 696 of 2018

Case Title: State of Kerala v. Subramanian Namboothiri and Anr.

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 695

Counsel for the appellant: Neema T.V.

Counsel for the respondents: P. Venugopal

Click to Read/Download Judgment