Madras High Court reduces sentence of women who drove minor to suicide; blames 'internalised misogyny'

The Madras High Court recently noted that internalised misogyny was a significant factor influencing the conduct of two women whose harsh and sexually charged remarks drove a 15-year-old girl to die by suicide by setting herself on fire [Kayar Nisha & Anr v State].

The two women had opposed a marriage proposed between their then 19-year-old nephew and the 15-year-old girl, who were said to be in love with each other.

The boy's father initially scolded his son over this relationship, but eventually agreed to make arrangements for his marriage. The boy and his father were then said to have gone to the girl's house to propose that she marry the boy.

The boy's aunts, displeased with this turn of events, were said to have verbally abused the young girl and driven her to die by suicide.

On July 2, Justice D Bharatha Chakravarthy noted that the aunts' conduct reflected deep-seated patriarchal attitudes and societal conditioning that lead women to blame other women, even when they are victims.

"Though I have considered the ill behaviour of the appellants (convicted women), admonishing the girl child instead of the boy, despite them being from the boy’s family, I take this into account again as a mitigating factor for imposing a lesser penalty. Their behaviour stems from internalised misogyny, which is a product of our male-dominated society. They are conditioned to question the female without realising they themselves are victims of such a mindset. In doing so, they harmed a girl child and made themselves liable for punishment," he said.

The High Court made the observation while convicting the two aunts for abetment of suicide, while reducing their jail sentence to the period of imprisonment already undergone (90 and 83 days, respectively).

The case began in August 2011, when the 15-year-old school-going girl was admitted to the CMC Hospital in Coimbatore with severe burn injuries.

While at the hospital, she gave a statement that she was in love with her 19-year-old neighbour, Saddam Hussain and that their parents eventually agreed to their marriage.

However, two of Hussain's aunts opposed it and were accused of barging into the girl's house and verbally abusing her by using sexually explicit language. They were also alleged to have told her to commit suicide.

Deeply disturbed and humiliated, the girl ran inside the house, poured kerosene on herself, and set herself on fire. Though she was rushed to the hospital, she succumbed to her injuries on September 2, 2011.

The two aunts were booked in a criminal case for committing the offence under Section 305 (abetment of suicide of a child) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

After a trial court sentenced them to three years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹2,000 each, the two women moved an appeal before the High Court.

The High Court concluded that there was enough material to hold the two women guilty of the crime, but decided to show some leniency in the punishment imposed on them, given their age and social background.

"This part of the area where the offence was committed, namely Kuniamuthur, is part of South Coimbatore, a metropolitan area, and these ordinary women, working as Domestic Helpers and Daily Wagers, are barely recognised or known and it cannot be said that their shorter imprisonment term will result in the erosion of the deterrent effect on the society. They have shown remorse and are only eking out their livelihood in their respective families and need not be committed again to Prison for reformation. They faced legal proceedings and were imprisoned immediately after arrest and sentencing," it noted.

The Court, therefore, directed that they need not serve further jail time. However, it increased the fine payable by the two women from ₹2,000 to ₹20,000 each.

The Court also briefly noted that had the marriage between the deceased girl and Hussain gone through, it may have been an offence since the girl was a minor.

"The girl was 15 years old at the time of the incident. In fact, if the incident occurred in 2012, the POCSO Act would have been in force by then, making it an offence if there was a marriage and physical relationship. The marriage, if celebrated, would have been a child marriage," it said.

Advocate J Franklin appeared for the appellants (convicted women).

Government Advocate JR Archana appeared for the State.

[Read Judgment]