Mumbai: The sessions court last week released on bail a 31-year-old labourer arrested for killing a man with a stone, considering that she hit the man in self-defence as the deceased was under the influence of alcohol and was trying to touch her inappropriately.
The woman was arrested on June 20, 2021, after the alleged incident that took place early in the morning. As per the prosecution, at 2.30 am the woman picked a quarrel with him and hit him with a stone on the head. The man was rushed to hospital but died before he received treatment. The incident was seen by a witness based on whose statement the woman was arrested by Dahisar police.
Bail Plea Moved After 3 Years
The woman was in prison for three years till her lawyer, SS Sawalkar, moved a bail plea. He argued that the woman is very poor, having no relatives. Sawalkar pleaded that the reason behind the quarrel, if considered, is a fit case of right of private defence. At odd hours the lonely woman was inappropriately touched by the deceased and therefore, it was a natural reaction of the accused to protect herself. He further submitted that as per the witness, there was only one hit, but the postmortem report shows that there were about six injuries.
The prosecution, however, argued that this cannot be a case of right of defence, since there were about six injuries. If the applicant really wanted to save herself, one or two hits were sufficient, but six blows clearly shows that the death was caused intentionally.
Court's Observation In The Case
The court accepted the arguments of defence and while granting bail observed: "It is seen that the applicant is a woman and was 31 years old at relevant time. The incident took place at odd hours, that is around 2 am. In the first information report (complainant son of the deceased) itself there is a reference that the applicant assaulted the deceased because he was inappropriately touching the informant. The postmortem report shows that at relevant time the deceased was under the influence of liquor. If all these circumstances are considered in proper perception, the arguments of the advocate for the applicant appear to be correct."
