The case involves the appellant who was accused of strangling a child in Perambalur on June 21, 2007. The appellant pleaded alibi, stating that she was not present at the time and place of the incident. The Trial Court and the High Court rejected the plea of alibi due to lack of corroborative evidence and inconsistencies in witness testimonies. The defense counsel also pointed out discrepancies in the testimony of the prosecution’s key witness, PW-1 Basheera. However, the Court rejected the argument, stating that such discrepancies are natural and do not necessarily discredit the witness’s testimony. Ultimately, the Court upheld the conviction of the appellant.

“The submissions made in the alternative that in the given set of circumstances, the present case could only be of culpable homicide not amounting to murder has only been noted to be rejected. Even if it be taken that there was a quarrel of the appellant with her mother-in-law (PW-1) in the morning of the date of incident because the appellant wanted to go the place of her father, it cannot be said that such a quarrel would make it a case of grave and sudden provocation. The circumstances as proved on record, and the manner of commission of crime, make it clear that the present case cannot be brought under any of the Exceptions of Section 300 IPC; and conviction and sentencing of the appellant under Section 302 IPC cannot be faulted.”

decided by the Supreme Court on Feb.22, 2023


Sanjiv Narang Adv. is an Advocate on Record in the Supreme Court of India. His qualifications include an LLB from University of Delhi and a Masters degree in Personnel Management from Panjab University,Chandigarh.In his more than 3 decades of experience, he has practiced law at the District, High Court and Supreme Court levels.He also has more than a decade of experience in the field of Management. He is the author of two books namely Laws for Women in India and Innovation, Why What and How.