'Protector Turns Predator': MP Court Awards Death Penalty To Man For Killing Adoptive Mother; Cites Ramcharitmanas, Quran On Filial Duty

The District and Sessions Court, Sheopur, on Wednesday (July 23), awarded capital punishment to a man for the brutal murder of his mother, driven by financial greed. While pronouncing the sentence, the court underscored the moral and ethical sanctity of the parent-child relationship by citing verses from the Ramcharitmanas, the Guru Granth Sahib, the Quran and the Bible.

The court observed that all major scriptures universally uphold the values of respect, care and obedience to parents, principles which the adopted son had gravely violated.

Referring to the principles established in Machhi Singh vs. State of Punjab 1983, the court held that the case fell within the ambit of the 'rarest of rare' category, warranting capital punishment under Section 302 of the IPC. 

Before arriving at the sentence, the Court underscored the chilling nature of the crime and the cold-blooded intent with which it was committed. It was observed that the manner in which the son executed the murder had left no scope for leniency. The Court remarked thus:

"...आरोपी द्वारा अपनी माता उषाबाई को जीने से धक्का देकर नीचे गिराया गया, फिर सरिये से उसके सिर में एक से अधिक बार वार किया गया, साडी से गला घोंटकर बाथरूम में शव को ईंट सीमेन्ट से चुनकर चबूतरा बना दिया और साक्ष्य को विलोपित किया। आरोपी द्वारा यह जानते हुए कि वह अपनी माता का नॉमिनी है और माता की मृत्यु के पश्चात् उसे समस्त राशि मिलना है। जेवर और रूपये प्राप्त करने के लिए बडे ही निर्मम तरीके से अपनी माता को मारकर हत्या की है। ऐसी स्थिति में आरोपी किसी भी दया का पात्र नहीं है। अपराध एक नृशंस प्रकृति का है।" [Translation : The accused pushed his mother down the stairs, then struck her on the head multiple times with an iron rod. He strangled her with a saree, concealed the body in the bathroom by encasing it with bricks and cement to form a platform, and attempted to destroy the evidence. The accused was fully aware that he was the nominee to his mother's accounts and that he would receive all the funds after her death. In order to obtain jewellery and cash, he brutally murdered his mother. In such a situation, the accused doesnt deserve any mercy. The crime is of a heinous and barbaric nature]

Special Judge Liladhar Solanki noted that, "When the person who is supposed to be the supporter and protector of aged parents becomes their predator, it shakes the conscious of society". 

The Court remarked in Hindi: 

"जिस पर माता पिता की रक्षा का दायित्व होता है, जो माता पिता के बुढापे का सहारा होता है वही यदि रक्षक ही भक्षक बन जावे तो फिर माता पिता उस संतान का लालन-पालन क्यों करेंगे। यदि बागड ही खेत खाने लग जाये तो फिर किसान किस पर विश्वास करेगा। आरोपी के विरूद्ध नरम रूख अपनाया गया तो कोई भी निःसंतान माता पिता किसी भी अनाथ बालक को गोद नहीं लेगे और समाज में काफी विपरीत प्रभाव होगा।" [Translation : The one who bears the responsibility of protecting the parents, who is supposed to be their support in old age, if that protector himself turns into a predator, then why would parents raise such a child? If the fence itself starts eating the crop, then whom will the farmer trust? If a lenient approach is taken towards the accused, no childless parents would dare adopt an orphan, and it would have a seriously adverse impact on society.]

The facts in brief

Accused Deepak was adopted from an orphanage in Gwalior at the age of one and raised by Usha Devi (deceased) and her husband with care and affection. He was provided with a good education and was made a nominee in his father's fixed deposits and all his mother's bank accounts. 

In 2021, Deepak's father, who was a guard in the forest department, passed away. Being a nominee, Deepak received INR 16.85 Lakhs, out of which he lost 14 Lakhs in the stock market and spent the remaining 2.85 Lakhs. 

Facing financial difficulties, he began demanding money from his mother, who had a total of around INR 32 Lakhs in her accounts. However, she repeatedly refused to give her any money. 

Testimonies from the neighbours confirmed that the mother and son frequently quarrelled over monetary demands. Several witnesses deposed that the accused had, on multiple occasions, demanded money from his mother and threatened her. 

According to the prosecution, on May 6 2024, between 10:30-11 AM, Usha Devi was going to water the tulsi plant after her bath when she encountered her son on the staircase. As she reached the midway point, the son pushed her, causing her to fall and sustain injuries to her head.

Seeing that she was still alive, her son struck her multiple times on the forehead with an iron rod. He then strangled her using her saree, wrapped her body in it and buried her under cement and bricks in the bathroom located beneath the staircase. 

Two days later, on May 8, 2024, he went to the police station to file a report regarding her mother, alleging that she had disappeared while he had gone to the hospital. However, discrepancies in his statements aroused suspicion and upon sustained interrogation, he confessed to the crime. 

Trial Court's judgment

Upon consideration of the evidence and witness statements, the court found that the prosecution had successfully established the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. 

The Court referred to the circumstantial evidence standard as laid down in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra to note that the following circumstances emerged against the accused:

• At the time of the incident, the accused was alone at home with his mother.
• When questioned, the accused stated that his mother had gone to the temple.
• The accused claimed that he himself had gone to the hospital for treatment.
• On the basis of the accused's disclosure, the deceased's jewellery and money were recovered.
• On the accused's disclosure, the body of the deceased, which had been buried with bricks and cement in the bathroom, was recovered upon excavation.

On the point of sentencing, the court invoked moral and religious teachings from major scriptures to underscore the sanctity of the parent-child relationship. Quoting from the Ramcharitmanas, the court cited:

"सुनु जननी सोइ सुतु बडभागी। जो पितु मातु वचन अनुरागी ।। तनय मातु पितु तोषनिहारा। दुलर्भ जननी सकल संसारा ।।" [Translation: Blessed is the child who is devoted to the words of his parents. A son who pleases his mother and father is rare in this world. 

From the Guru Granth Sahib, the court quoted:

"...मात पिता की सेवा करही, अपना गति भित्ती जाणी। मात पिता को वीरा कहे वीर बिना कुल कैसे चले। मात पिता की आज्ञा सिर धरे, मात पिता की राखी करे। दयाल दया करे, जिसु माता का झोला निबालिया। सो दिनु मुठे भुलाणे।"  [Translation: He who serves his parents is called a true warrior. Without such a warrior, how can the family lineage continue? One who places the commands of his parents on his head, O fool, have you now forgotten the day you once played in your mother's lap?.] 

The court also referred to the Quranic Verse Surah Al-Isra (17:23)

"...तुम्हारे रब ने फैसला कर दिया है कि उसके सिवा किसी की बंदगी न करो और माँ बाप के साथ अच्छा व्यवहार करो। यदि उनमें से कोई एक या दोनों ही तुम्हारे सामने बुढापे को पहुँच जाये तो उन्हें उह तक न कहो और न उन्हें झिझको बल्कि उनसे शिष्टतापूर्वक बात करो।" [Translation : Your Lord has decreed that you worship none but him and that you be kind to your parents. If one or both of them attain old age in your life, say not to them a word of disrespect, nor shout at them, but address them in terms of honour]. 

From the holy Bible, the court cited, 

"Honour your father and your mother. Anyone who strikes or curses their parents must be put to death." (Exodus 21:15-17)

The court observed that each of these scriptures universally promotes the principles of filial piety, obedience and care for parents, particularly in their old age. 

Against this backdrop, the court sentenced him to the death penalty along with a fine of INR 1,000. He was also sentenced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment with a fine of INR 1,000. 

Case Title: State of MP v Deepak Pachouri (ST/70/2024)

Click here to read the Judgment