In Brief
A mother was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for allegedly strangling her infant son. The Supreme Court acquitted her, finding the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The alleged confessions lacked independent corroboration and suffered from infirmities. The circumstantial evidence did not form a complete chain, with gaps in the appellant's whereabouts and a significant time gap between alleged death and examination. The dupatta allegedly used was not shown to the post-mortem doctor, and forensic evidence was not definitively linked to the deceased. Critically, her immediate effort to obtain medical assistance contradicted guilt, and no convincing motive existed for such an act against her own child.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.