Mother gets life term for killing 3-month-old girl in Greater Noida

The family members had claimed that the child had died of a fall from the cot. The court held the woman guilty on the basis of a postmortem report and circumstantial evidence.

The district court awarded a life imprisonment to a woman for killing her 3-month-old girl child. The family members had claimed that the child had died of a fall from the cot. The court held the woman guilty on the basis of a postmortem report and circumstantial evidence.

The district court awarded a life imprisonment to a woman for killing her 3-month-old girl child. (Representative Photo)

“Additional session judge held the accused mother guilty and awarded her a life imprisonment. The order was delivered last week,” Chaman Prakash Sharma, district government counsel, said on Tuesday.

According to the prosecution, complainant Irshad, a resident of Nai Abadi, on October 5, 2015, lodged an FIR at Dadri police station stating that he, along with his wife Farzana, lives in the room on the terrace of his parents’ house.

He had a three-month-old daughter Kasifa. His wife and daughter were in the room and he was sitting with his parents when his wife came down and told him that Kasifa was dead. She was alright minutes before, when he had gone downstairs. He stated that her death did not appear to be natural and requested an investigation and legal action.

Police sent the body for a postmortem examination. The report said the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of smothering. On October 8, 2015, police registered a murder case naming Farzana as the accused. A charge sheet was filed against her under the IPC Section 302 (murder).

During the trial, 10 witnesses were produced before the court. Six from Irshad’s family turned hostile and claimed that the child had died of a fall from the cot. The district hospital doctor, who conducted the autopsy, told the court that the death was due to smothering.

“Circumstantial evidence points to the death not being natural . The accused could not give a satisfactory explanation. She later claimed her dupatta got tangled around the child’s neck when she fell from the cot. But there were no such marks on the child’s neck,” Sharma said.

“In a case based on circumstantial evidence, where no eyewitness account is available, there is another principle of law which must be kept in mind. It is that when incriminating circumstance is put to the accused and the accused either offers no explanation or offers an explanation which is found to be untrue, then the same becomes an additional link in the chain of circumstances to make it complete,” Sharma said.