A 24-year-old woman, Greeshma, became the youngest to be awarded a death penalty in Kerala when the Neyyattinkara Additional Sessions Court pronounced her quantum of sentence on Monday in the Sharon Raj murder case. Greeshma was found guilty of poisoning her long-term boyfriend, Sharon Raj, using pesticide-laced herbal medicine in October 2022.
Greeshma was arrested on October 31, 2022, followed by her mother and uncle, who were involved in plotting the murder.
WHO IS GREESHMA?
- Greeshma is a convict in Sharon Raj murder case.
- She killed her boyfriend in the year 2022.
- She was a literature student at a private college in Kanyakumari.
- Greeshma remained under custody for nearly a year until the Kerala High Court granted her bail on September 25, 2023.
- She is the youngest woman in Kerala to get death penalty.
WHAT IS THE SHARON RAJ MURDER CASE?
Greeshma studied literature at a private college in Tamil Nadu’s Kanyakumari district. The victim Sharon Raj, a native of Parassala in the Thiruvananthapuram district, was a final year BSc Radiology student at the same college. Both were in a close relationship for over a year.
Greeshma wanted to end her relationship as she was simultaneously engaged to another man but Sharon refused, following which Greeshma conspired to kill him.
On October 14, 2022, when Sharon visited Greeshma at Greeshma’s residence, she offered him an ayurvedic decoction, which she had laced with pesticide. Sharon consumed the concoction and over the next 11 days, he battled for his life in the ICU before succumbing to organ failure.
In his declaration to a magistrate, Sharon named Greeshma and revealed he had consumed herbal medicine provided by her. As he was suspicious of her action, he had even recorded a video of the drink before consuming it. Later, forensic analysis confirmed the presence of pesticide in the decoction, evidence of Greeshma’s role was found during further investigation.
The police filed a detailed charge sheet on January 25, 2023. Over 95 witnesses were examined during the trial, which began on October 15, 2024, and concluded on January 3, 2025.
WHAT ARE THE CHARGES AGAINST GREESHMA?
Special public prosecutor VS Vineeth Kumar charged that Greeshma wanted to end her relationship with Sharon as her family had arranged a marriage with another man from Kerala.
Later, Greeshma conspired with her uncle, Nirmalakumaran Nair, the third accused, and her mother to hatch a plan to kill Sharon. The court sentenced Nair to three years of imprisonment.
Greeshma faced multiple charges under the IPC, including:
- Section 302: Murder
- Section 364: Abduction with intent to commit murder
- Section 328: Administering poison with intent to harm life
- Section 203: Obstruction of justice by providing false information
WHAT COURT SAID
The judge said that Greeshma chose a time when her family was away and administered the poison in a way that made it difficult to detect. She had planned the murder carefully, taking every opportunity to deceive Sharon and ensure that her actions would remain hidden.
“This being a case of murder by administration of poison Greeshma has done it in utmost secrecy. She chose the time when her parents and uncle were away from home. Sharon had told PW2 that Greeshma has asked him to go there for sex. She had convinced him last night by lengthy call about their meeting. She took him into confidence with ulterior motive. Her, preparations for the commission of the offence were secret and deceitful”, the Judge added.
“It is the State’s responsibility to ensure punishment for criminal acts. Evidence such as Sharon recording a video of the suspicious juice, despite Greeshma asking him not to record, indicates that he suspected something was wrong. Sharon fought for his life for 11 days without even consuming a drop of water,” court said.
The court also noted that the convict’s claim of physical abuse from Sharon lacked proof.
“On the contrary, Sharon had never blamed her in any messages or communications. While Sharon remained committed to the accused, she was simultaneously in contact with her fiance,” the court said, noting that the convict’s age should not be considered in addition to the gravity of the crime committed.