Gauhati High Court Confirms Life Sentence for Son Who Murdered Mother Over Rs 30 for Liquor
In a significant ruling, the Gauhati High Court has refused to reduce the life sentence of a man who brutally killed his mother after she gave him only Rs 30 to buy alcohol. The court dismissed the appellant's arguments of provocation and intoxication, emphasizing the deliberate nature of the crime.
Court's Firm Stance on the Heinous Crime
The bench comprising Justice Michael Zothankhuma and Justice Kaushik Goswami was hearing the criminal appeal filed by Sankar Narayan Nandi, who had challenged his life imprisonment for hacking his mother to death with a bothi dao, a sharp-edged household weapon typically used for cutting vegetables and fish. The court upheld the punishment on January 30, stating that while the act may not have been premeditated, there was a clear sudden intention to kill.
The judgment noted, "Though there may not have been any pre-meditation in the killing of the deceased by the appellant, the weapon used with great force on the neck of the deceased leads us to the conclusion that there was a sudden intention on the part of the appellant to kill the deceased."
Key Findings and Evidence Presented
The court based its decision on several critical findings:
- The appellant alone was responsible for the murder, with no involvement from others.
- The provocation was initiated by the appellant when he began abusing his mother for giving him only Rs 30.
- The mother slapping the appellant during a scuffle with his uncle did not constitute provocation against him.
- The use of a bothi dao on a vital body part, nearly severing the neck, indicated immense force.
- Death was instantaneous due to injury over the spinal cord, confirmed as homicidal by medical evidence.
Medical reports detailed a chop wound measuring 12cm x 7cm on the spinal cord, cutting through skin, muscles, vessels, nerves, and vertebrae, with sharp margins and blood clots.
Eyewitness Testimony and Defense Rejection
The key eyewitness was the appellant's own father, who testified that he saw his son demand money from his mother, receive Rs 30, and then strike her neck with the weapon before fleeing. The court found the father's testimony trustworthy and corroborated by the maternal uncle's statement.
The appellant's defense claimed he was intoxicated and incapable of rational judgment, suggesting his maternal uncle was the perpetrator. However, the court rejected this, stating there was no evidence to support his explanation and that his answers implied guilt.
"We do not have any reason to believe the explanation given by the appellant that he was not the perpetrator of the crime. In fact, the answers given by the appellant to questions implies that he had killed his mother," the court observed.
Legal Arguments and Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC
Defense advocates argued for protection under Exception 4 to Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code, which reduces murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder in cases of sudden fight without premeditation. They cited the appellant's intoxication and the mother slapping him as grave provocation.
However, the prosecution, led by Additional Public Prosecutor A Begum, countered that the appellant initiated the provocation, abused his mother, and deliberately used a deadly weapon. The court agreed, noting that since there was no fight between the appellant and his mother, Exception 4 did not apply.
Background of the Tragic Incident
The crime occurred on the morning of March 16, 2016, at a railway quarter in Jalukbari, Guwahati. Nandi, addicted to alcohol, had taken money from his mother, Gita Rani Nandi, earlier and left. He returned intoxicated, demanded more money, and became enraged when she gave him Rs 30. After abusing her verbally, a scuffle ensued with his maternal uncle, during which the mother slapped Nandi. Enraged, Nandi picked up the bothi dao and hacked her neck.
A trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment on July 13, 2016, which he appealed. The High Court's confirmation underscores the judiciary's stance on such brutal acts, prioritizing evidence and witness credibility over claims of diminished responsibility due to alcohol.
