Today, in the matter of Jollyamma Joseph @ Jolly v State of Kerala & Anr, the High Court of Kerala rejected the plea filed by Jollyamma Joseph. The Court refused to interlope the decision of the trial court's decision to frame charges against Jollyamma Joseph.

The bench was headed by Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas dismissed the plea filed by Jolly. In which the orders of the trial court were challenged.

Case Background 

In the said matter, Jolly was charged with offences punishable under Sections 110 (abetment, if person abetted, does act with different intention from that of abettor), 120(B) (criminal conspiracy), 465 (forgery), 467 (Forgery of valuable security, will, etc.), 468 (Forgery for cheating purpose), 471(Using as genuine a fraud document), 475 (Counterfeiting device or mark used for authenticating documents), 302 (murder), 201(Causing disappearance of evidence) with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and provisions of the Poison Act, 1919.

The case was referred to as the 6 mysterious death of the victims who were close relatives of Jolly, the main accused. Three of the persons alleged to have been murdered by Jolly through cyanide poisoning.  Jolly was supposedly in an extra-marital affair with another man whom she convinced to get cyanide for her.

She is alleged to have mixed the cyanide in the food that Roy was eating with the intention to kill him.

On September 30, 2011, Jolly’s husband felt sick after eating, was hospitalised and subsequently, passed away. At the time, Jolly informed the relatives that Roy had died because of a heart attack.

An FIR was forwarded to the Session Court, and an investigation was being done.  The investigating agency was sent to watch the daily activities of the accused and after collecting some evidence, the investigating agency decided to exhume the graveyards of the deceased including Roy.

Jolly was arrested by the investigating agency on October 5, 2019, along with two other accused persons.

During the pendency of the said petition before the High Court, Jolly moved the trial court again with a petition under section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) in order to adjourn the framing of the charge till the disposal of the criminal revision petition.

However, the trial court rejected this petition as well leading to the present revision petition before the High Court.