TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1978 (6) TMI 171
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... While P.W.1 was about 2 or 3 years of age Saffiya was divorced by her husband. Since then she was residing in a small thatched shed consisting of a small room and a kitchen thinly partitioned by cadjan leaves, along with her children. She was eking out her livelihood as an agricultural labourer. Kochu, a married man who was conducting a tea shop about half a kilometre away from the residence of Saffiya, used to make nocturnal visits to her which in due course resulted in her pregnancy. While she was five months' pregnant, Saffiya informed Kochu of it. But he was not prepared either to marry her or accept the paternity of the child in her womb. Kochu sought the assistance of Kochupennu to terminate the pregnancy. At about 9-30 p.m. on September 13, 1975 Kochu and Kochupennu came to the house of Saffiya and Kochu wanted Saffiya to save his honour and submit to abortion. Much against her will Saffiya was compelled to submit to the wishes of Kochu and at the instance of Kochu, Kochupennu administered some medicine into the vagina of Saffiya. Before doing this, P.W.1 and his younger brother who were sleeping with their mother on the same mat were asked to go to the kitchen. After ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... second accused to suffer simple imprisonment for six months. On appeal the Court of Session, Trichur, confirmed the convictions of the accused, but reduced the sentence passed on the first accused to rigorous imprisonment for 18 months while confirming the sentence passed against the second accused. 4. Strongly assailing the convictions and sentences passed against the accused, Sri V. Narayana Menon, learned advocate appearing for them, contended that it is unsafe to place any reliance on the evidence of P.W.1, that Ext. P-3 suffers from infirmities, that Ext. P-6, postmortem certificate, has not been properly proved, that there is no conclusive medical evidence that there was criminal abortion and that therefore the Petitioners are entitled to a clear acquittal. 5. It was argued that this must have been only a natural abortion. P.W.9 has described in detail the symptoms noticed on Saffiya in Ext. P-7, the wound certificate, issued by her. She has clearly stated in chief-examination that the abortion was not a natural one, that the abortion was incomplete, that by introducing something into the vagina this sort of abortion could take place, that generally when abortion was c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ffiya and there at the instance of the first accused the second accused administered certain medicine to Saffiya to terminate her pregnancy without her consent and that as a result of this Saffiya developed illness and complications and ultimately she was taken to the Maternity Hospital, Trichur, where she died. During cross-examination, P.W.1 stated that the second accused is residing not far away from their house. The prosecution has clearly established that the accused in furtherance of their common intention caused criminal miscarriage to Saffiya without her consent. 6. What remains for decision is whether Saffiya died as a result of the criminal miscarriage. It was contended that the post-mortem certificate Ext. P-6 has not been properly proved and therefore it cannot be said that the death of Saffiya was as a result of criminal abortion. According to the counsel for the accused, the burden cast on the prosecution in this regard cannot be said to have been discharged by the mere examination of a medical officer who is familiar with the hand-writing and signature of the doctor who issued Ext. P-6; but the prosecution must prove the contents of the document and also elicit fr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Evidence Act, the certificate issued by him is relevant and admissible under Section 32(2) of the Evidence Act. The weight to be attached to such a report or its probative value depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The court can come to its independent conclusion on the cause of death, if there is independent evidence on record in support of it. Then the question is whether the statements made in Ext. P-6, post-mortem certificate, containing what was observed by the doctor during autopsy and the conclusion arrived at by him therein have been properly proved in accordance with law. Section 67 of the Evidence Act speaks of the mode of proof of a document. Under Section 67 if a document is alleged to be signed or to have been written wholly or in part by any person, the signature or the hand-writing of so much of the document as is alleged to be in that person's hand-writing must be proved to be in his hand-writing. In this case, as already stated, prosecution was not able to procure the attendance of the doctor who held autopsy without unreasonable delay or expense. In such cases, a statement coming under Section 32(2) of the Evidence Act has to be proved by ....