Charges and Convictions
Greeshma was charged under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, including:
- Section 302: Murder
- Section 363: Abduction
- Section 201: Destruction of evidence
Greeshma’s mother, Sindhu (56), and uncle, Nirmalakumaran Nair (60), were accused of destroying evidence to shield her. While the court found Nirmal guilty and sentenced him to three years of imprisonment, Sindhu was acquitted due to insufficient evidence.
Case Details and Investigation
The investigation revealed that Greeshma was in a relationship with Sharon but wanted to end it to pursue marriage with an Indian Army personnel whose family had sent her a proposal. The murder was premeditated, as evidenced by an earlier failed attempt to poison Sharon by mixing an overdose of paracetamol tablets into juice, which he refused to drink due to its bitter taste.
On the day of the crime, three hours before poisoning Sharon, Greeshma searched Wikipedia for information on the effects of the herbicide on the human body. This digital evidence was presented in court and played a critical role in securing the conviction.
Observations by the Court
The court praised the Kerala Police for their efficient investigation, led by DSP Johnson, and their use of modern investigative techniques and circumstantial evidence. Special Public Prosecutor VS Vineeth Kumar effectively presented the case, including the digital evidence of Greeshma’s internet searches.
The court noted that Greeshma exploited Sharon’s trust, luring him under false pretenses of continuing their relationship. Despite their ongoing romantic connection, her actions were deliberate and malicious. The judgment emphasized that Sharon, even on his deathbed, continued to love Greeshma and did not wish for her punishment. However, the court clarified that Sharon’s wishes were irrelevant in the face of overwhelming evidence of premeditated murder.
Societal Impact and Court's Remarks
The court highlighted the grave betrayal of trust and the dangerous precedent set by such crimes, stating that the case sends a message of caution to society. It dismissed arguments regarding Greeshma’s age and lack of prior criminal history, pointing out her repeated attempts to harm Sharon.
The court also observed that Sharon’s video recording of the incident, driven by suspicion about the drink, provided critical evidence. His prolonged suffering and eventual death underscore the heinous nature of the crime.
This landmark judgment serves as a stern reminder of the consequences of betrayal and premeditated violence, underscoring the importance of justice in deterring such acts. Greeshma’s sentence reflects the severity of her actions, ensuring accountability for the tragic loss of a young life.
The opinions posted here do not belong to 🔰www.indiansdaily.com. The author is solely responsible for the opinions.
As per the IT policy of the Central Government, insults against an individual, community, religion or country, defamatory and inflammatory remarks, obscene and vulgar language are punishable offenses. Legal action will be taken for such expressions of opinion.