Didn't Have Maturity To Accept Rejection, Killed Her By Pouring Petrol On Her: Madras High Court Dismisses Convict's Appeal In Murder Case

Upholding the conviction of a 28-year-old man who set a class IX student on fire in 2018 merely because she rejected his proposal, the Madras High Court has said such incidents are on the rise and only reflect the fact that man considers woman chattel and wants to own or "forcibly take her under his control" without understanding that she is a human being, who is entitled to "decide on her wishes".

"This is yet another case where a man did not have the maturity to accept the rejection of love proposal made to the deceased and hence, decided to kill her in a gory fashion by pouring petrol on her and setting her on fire," said the court.

The division bench of Justice J Nisha Banu and Justice Anand Venkatesh further observed:

This loathsome act was committed by the appellant with the only motive that the girl who did not reciprocate the love proposal made by him, should not live in this world and she should not have any relationship with anybody else in this world.

The accused in the case was working as an AC mechanic and "fell in love" with the 14-year-old girl, who in "categoric terms" told him that she was not interested in getting into a relationship with him. However, he went on harassing her and in 2017, a complaint was also filed against him. The police case "resulted in a enmity towards the deceased and the aggression of the appellant" was only getting severe, the court noted.

On February 16 in 2018, when the girl was returning from school along with her friends, the accused came on a two-wheeler and restrained the victim. He then poured petrol on her and set her on fire with a cigarette lighter, as per the police case.

The whole body of the girl was burnt and she succumbed to her injuries on February 27, 2018. The accused Balamurugan was convicted under Section 302 and 342 IPC and sentenced to a life imprisonment in 2019.

Though in appeal his counsel highlighted various "discrepancies" in the evidence of the prosecution, the division bench was satisfied that there was cogent evidence to prove the guilt of the appellant.

"In the considered view of this Court, we come to a categoric conclusion that the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubts with abundant evidence and there is absolutely no ground to interfere with the well considered order and judgment passed by the Court below," said the court, while dismissing the convict's appeal.

Need To Focus on Emotional Quotient

The court said love and hate are related to each other in a complex manner and there has been a serious study by psychologists which shows that under certain conditions, a person's love generates a "corresponding level of hate" when negative events occur with his or her romantic partner.

"Whatever may be the result of the study, such mutual respect for a woman must start from home and it must be inculcated by the parents and the society as such," said the court.

It noted that today's youngsters fall "too short on the emotional quotient" and even the slightest of disturbance and rejection makes them take extreme steps without understanding the consequences.

"It is high time that our educational system starts focusing more on the emotional quotient than on the intelligence quotient. If this is not done, howsoever successful or bright an youngster may be, he is not ready to take up emotional challenges and the situation worsens when the parents instead of guiding their children start pampering them," said the court.

The court said the 28-year-old man was running after a girl, who was studying in 9th standard and was expecting her to react positively and get into a love affair.

"When it did not fructify, he chose to resort to a monstrous act of pouring petrol on the girl and setting her on fire. He did not realise that this foolish act will bring to an end his connections with the society to a grinding halt and will confine him to the prison for his life," it added.

Case Title: Balamurugan v State

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 440

Case No: Crl A No. 174 of 2020

Counsel for the Appellant: Mr BN Raja Mohamed

Counsel for the Respondent: Mr R Meenakshi Sundaram, Additional Public Prosecutor