MP HC acquits woman after 14 years in jail, orders prosecution of cops, witnesses

The Madhya Pradesh high court acquitted a woman, who had been in jail for 14 years in a murder case, and ordered prosecution against five witnesses and three investigating officers for falsely implicating her. The court said that if the prosecution witnesses and investigating officers are allowed to go scot-free, then it would encourage such unscrupulous persons to falsely implicate innocent persons. The court lamented that nobody would be in a position to return those days back to the appellant woman. (Representational image) A division bench of judge GS Ahluwalia and Vishal Mishra also pulled up the trial court and said it is really unfortunate that the trial judge took the matter in a most casual manner and did not appreciate the evidence in the light of provisions of law. A resident of Piploda vilageof Khandwa drict, Surajbai and her ser Bhuribai, then in early 20’s, were arrested in September 2008 for allegedly killing her brother-in-law Hari alias Bhaggu giving poison and strangulation. The court found flaws in the case which said that Surjabai and Bhuribai killed Hari and tried to show it as a case of suicide hanging him to a neem tree. Surajbai said her mother-in-law had informed her about the suicide. She took him to hospital in a bullock cart and later informed the police. The women were convicted in December 2010 a trial court of Khandwa. Bhuribai got the bail, but Surajbai had been in jail since then. She appealed before the MP high court against the trial court judgement. The court found many lacunae. It said that it appears that because of enmity with appellant Surajbai, the prosecution witnesses had falsely implicated Surajbai. The court said as nobody appeared on behalf of the appellant, in the light of judgment passed Supreme Court, the court itself went through the record of the trial court and heard the learned counsel for the state.  “The most unfortunate part is that Bhuribai, who is the ser of Surajbai and was pregnant, was also roped in without any basis. The prosecution has failed to prove that any poisonous substance was adminered to the deceased in the house of Surajbai, but even the prosecution has failed to prove that it was Surajbai or Bhuribai who took the deceased to the hospital,”said the court order. “Why did the police not investigate when and under what circumstances, the dead body of the deceased was taken to the hospital and whom? When the deceased Hari came back to village Piplod has also not been investigated. Why the compounder or any other person who had allegedly declared the deceased Hari as dead was not examined is also a mystery? Why did the police not examine the owner of the bullock cart. Therefore, it is clear that the prosecution witnesses have deposed falsely before the court. Even the investigating officers, leaving important links untouched, have facilitated witnesses to create a false case,” said the court. The bench said, “The irony is that Surajbai was never granted bail after her conviction and as per the information sent the office of superintendent, Central Jail, Indore, the appellant Surajbai had already undergone the actual incarceration of 13 years and 11 months as on August 22, 2024. Nobody would be in a position to return those days back to the appellant Surajbai. Bhuribai has remained in jail for 3 months and 4 days. This court has already considered the trauma which must have been undergone Bhuribai, because she was sent to jail along with her one-year-old daughter and three-year-old son. Under these circumstances, this court is of the considered opinion, that if the prosecution witnesses and investigating officers are allowed to go scot-free, then it would encourage such unscrupulous persons to falsely implicate the innocent persons.” The court directed the trial court to initiate proceedings against these witnesses for giving false evidence before the court of law. “The trial court must realise that they are dealing with the life and liberty of a person, and no one should be punished without sound principles of law. Blindly accepting the Examination-in-Chief of the prosecution witnesses, without testing the same on the anvil of their cross examination is not the proper way of appreciation of evidence. The trial court should not forget that cross-examination is the only tool in the hands of the accused to dislodge the prosecution case. Ignoring cross examination cannot be said to be the proper method of deciding the trial. In the present case, one lady has remained in jail for 14 years and another was compelled to live in jail along with her minor kids. Therefore, the manner in which the trial court handled the case is not appreciated,” the bench said.