SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1964 Supreme(Mad) 265

ANANTANARAYANAN, NATESAN
In re, Govindswami – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent


Advocates:
S. Swamikannu Amicus Curiae Appellant. Public Prosecutor, for the State.

Judgement

NATESAN, J. :- One Govindaswami, who has been, evicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life under S. 302, I.P.C. for the murder of his father. Kondathu Gounder, is the appellant.

2. That Kondathu Gounder died of homicidal violence at the hands of the accused prisoner, is established beyond reasonable doubt by the evidence on record. The real question for consideration, however, is whether the appellant is entitled to the benefit of the exemption provided in S. 84. I.P.C.

3. The deceased, Kondathu Gounder, first married one Kaveri, by whom he had two daughters, Venkatammal and Saraswathi, and two sons, Govindaswami (accused) and Gopal (P.W. 5). The daughters are not yet married. On the death of Kaveri about 10 years prior to the occurrence, he married her sister, Rajammal (P.W. 1). P.W. 1 speaks to the relevant circumstances preceding the occurrence. The deceased is stated to have sold about 13 acres of fertile land of the family out of the 30 acres owned to P.W. 1, and this was resented by the accused. P.W. I. states that the accused heat her on two or three occasions, and her husband, the deceased not being able to control the accused, she left for her father's house at S















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top