The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently in the case of Bharti Patel vs State of Madhya Pradesh, ruled that throwing a toddler on the floor constitutes attempted murder, rejecting a plea to dismiss a First Information Report (FIR) against a woman, Bharti Patel. Patel faced charges under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code in 2022 for allegedly throwing her child on the courtroom floor during a maintenance hearing with her husband.
Clear Intent to Kill:
Justice Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia stated that the woman had no authority to throw her child on the floor or to hurl a paperweight toward him, indicating clear intent to kill. The Court emphasized that tossing a 13-month-old on the floor alone constitutes attempted murder, and throwing a paperweight exacerbates the situation. Patel sought to dismiss the case, claiming it was filed in retaliation by a lawyer.
However, the Court remarked that the facts were distressing, noting the woman blamed her child for her troubles. It observed that she threw the child on the floor and attempted to hit him with a paperweight, intending to kill him, but he survived due to the paperweight missing his head.
Distressing Behavior in Court
The Court noted that Patel had received a notice under Section 12 of the Court of Contempt Act for her behavior during proceedings in the magisterial court. Despite his recent release on bail, she refused to give her statement, insisting her husband be present. When the Court suggested giving her husband another chance to pay arrears, she shouted and threw her 13-month-old child on the floor, contrary to courtroom decorum.
Dismissal of Sympathetic Consideration
The Court observed that despite the Presiding Officer’s repeated instructions to pick up her child, Patel refused, showing no concern for the child’s crying. She persisted in disruptive behavior despite the Court’s admonitions. Justice Ahluwalia remarked that Patel caused disturbance in court and attempted to harm her child during a proceeding under Section 125 of the CrPC.
The Court dismissed any notion that the FIR against Patel was an afterthought, concluding that sympathetic consideration was unwarranted given the circumstances.
Conclusion
The ruling by the Madhya Pradesh High Court sets a precedent regarding the gravity of offenses involving violence against children. It underscores the Court’s commitment to upholding justice and ensuring accountability for such reprehensible actions.
Read More: Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, States High Court, Other Courts, International
