BENGALURU: A four-year-old boy’s testimony proved crucial in a court awarding life imprisonment to his father and grandmother for the murder of his mother in 2011. The sessions court had passed its judgment in 2016 when the boy was aged about nine. On Tuesday, the High Court upheld the court order.

A division bench of Justices K N Phaneendra and B A Patil also dismissed the criminal appeal filed by boy’s grandmother Parvathi (62) and father Ravish (45), residents of Apperi Pademane Vittala Kasaba village in Bantwal taluk of Dakshina Kannada district. The duo had appealed against the conviction and sentencing by the First Additional District and Sessions Judge on August 12, 2016, based on Rohitaswa’s testimony.

The boy had told the investigating officer that his ‘ajji’ and ‘appa’ had murdered his mother. This was videographed by the officer and proved crucial evidence in the case. The sessions court had also imposed a fine of Rs 5,000 on each of them and ordered the District Legal Services Committee to take steps to determine and pay adequate compensation to Rohitaswa and to take necessary rehabilitation measures.

According to the judgment of the sessions court, Rohitaswa, then four years old, was an eye-witness to the murder of his mother Saraswathi, who was hacked to death by Ravish and Parvathi at 8 am on February 17, 2011, using sickles.

Ravish and Parvathi were arrested by the local police, based on a complaint was filed by Saraswathi’s father. Ravish and Parvathi, who were labourers, allegedly had a quarrel with Saraswathi, who was rolling beedis, over household work and selling of property. They also suspected her fidelity.

On that day, the duo assaulted Saraswathi and killed her. Vittla police had registered the case. The judge offered toffees to boy Rohitaswa’s statement was recorded by the district judge in his chamber after building a rapport with him by offering toffees. His statement had earlier been video-recorded by the police a day after his mother’s murder.

During the trial, the district judge chose not to administer oath to the boy after having a conversation with him in the chamber. The child witness was answering the questions in one or two words and the statement was recorded in question and answer form. “(Since the witness is aged about 9 and says that he is studying in 4th standard, he does not seem to be knowing about the importance of the oath. The statement is recorded without administering oath to the witness)”, the district court judgment said.