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

1938 Supreme(Mad) 203

PANDRANG ROW


JUDGMENT

Pandrang Row, J.

1. The appellant has been convicted of murder by the Sessions Judge of East Tanjore and sentenced to undergo transportation for life under Section 302, Penal Code. The charge against him is that he murdered his wife Annapurni by strangling her some time during the night of 8th June 1936 in his house at Kuttalam. The appellant and his wife belong to rich mirasdar families. They were married in April-May 1935. The appellant was about 22 years old and his wife about 19 years old at the time of the occurrence. The appellant and his paternal uncle Sivagurunatha Pillai are the only members of a joint family which owns properties worth about three lakhs of rupees. It is clear from the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge that this paternal uncle as well as the appellants father-in-law and the latters relations not only did nothing to help the appellant in his defence but even actively assisted the prosecution. At least three vakils appear to have been engaged to assist the prosecution while the appellant was left to his own devices. The trial of the accused in the Sessions Court did not begin till October 1937, that is to say, till after a long interval of 16 mon










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