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

2018 Supreme(Mad) 3634

M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Rajendiran – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A. Arasu Ganesan, Adv., V. Saratha Devi, Adv.

JUDGMENT

M. Nirmal Kumar, J.

The appellant is the accused No.1 in S.C.406 of 2007 on the file of the Sessions Court (Mahila Court) Cuddalore. The appellant along with two others who were charged and tried for an offence under Section 316 of the Indian Penal Code. On conclusion of trial, the Trial Court had convicted the appellant and had acquitted the other two accused. In the above case the prosecution had examined 10 witnesses and had marked Exs.P1 to P6. No witness were examined and no documents were marked by the accused.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.06.2005 at about 09.00 a.m. the accused had cut a tree in the garden of PW1, when it was questioned, the accused had assaulted the said Saraswathy by hands and kicked on her stomach, due to which, she had a forcible abortion, for which she had preferred a complaint. On completion of investigation the prosecution had filed the charge sheet against the appellant and two others.

3. Pw1 victim states that the appellant/first accused had kicked her, due to which she felled down and further, he kicked on her stomach, the other accused had pulled her legs and they also abused her, due to the fall, she developed stomach pain an



















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