The Jharkhand High Court has acquitted a woman who had been convicted in a 2004 encounter-related case, holding that the prosecution failed to establish her involvement in the alleged offences. The Court ruled that merely being present at the scene with her young child and being the wife of an alleged extremist could not justify a criminal conviction without clear evidence of participation.
Background of the Case
The appeal was filed by Pramila Devi against her conviction by a trial court in 2007. She had been found guilty under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the Arms Act and the Criminal Law Amendment Act following a police operation in Jharkhand's Gumla district in January 2004.
According to the prosecution, police and CRPF personnel launched a search operation after receiving information that armed extremists were hiding near a village. During the operation, an exchange of fire allegedly took place. Two persons were killed, several others reportedly escaped, and Pramila Devi, who was carrying her one-and-a-half-year-old daughter, was apprehended at the spot. Weapons, ammunition and other materials were also recovered from the area.
The trial court convicted her, primarily concluding that she was an active member of the extremist group and shared common intention with the other accused.
Court's Observations
Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary closely examined the evidence recorded during the trial and found significant shortcomings in the prosecution's case.
The Court noted that none of the witnesses assigned any specific role to the appellant during the alleged encounter. It observed that although she was found at the location, she was carrying a small child and there was no reliable evidence showing that she fired at police personnel, possessed illegal weapons or actively participated in the alleged offences.
The bench also found that one prosecution witness attempted to improve the case by claiming that a pistol had been recovered from the appellant's possession, even though no such statement had been made earlier and other witnesses did not support that version.
Further, the Court found no material showing that Pramila Devi was a member of any extremist organisation. It also noted that no other criminal case had been shown to be pending against her.
Emphasising the need for evidence rather than assumptions, the bench observed:
“Mere presence of the appellant at the place of occurrence that too with a child aged 1½ years on the lap and merely because she happens to be the wife of an extremist is not sufficient to sustain the conviction of the appellant.”
The Court further observed that there was no definite evidence of recovery of any firearm or incriminating article from her possession and no direct or specific evidence establishing any overt act committed by her.
Court's Decision
The High Court held that the trial court had failed to properly appreciate the evidence and had wrongly concluded that the appellant was an active member of the extremist group without supporting material on record.
Although Pramila Devi had already served the sentence imposed upon her and had been released from prison in 2011 after completing the sentence and paying the fine, the High Court held that the case deserved an acquittal on merits.
Accordingly, the Court set aside the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence and allowed the criminal appeal, acquitting Pramila Devi of all charges.
Case Details
Case Title: Pramila Devi v. The State of Jharkhand
Case Number: Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 597 of 2009
Judge: Justice Anubha Rawat Choudhary
Decision Date: 06 July 2026
-300x169.webp)
