Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
K.K.Ramakrishnan, J
S.Suriyaprakash – Appellant
Versus
State represented by The Inspector of Police – Respondent
JUDGMENT
The appellants/Accused in S.C.No.69 of 2015 on the file of the learned Additional District Session Judge (Fast Track), Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District, have filed this appeal, challenging the conviction and sentence imposed against them on 06.07.2018, under Sections 341, 323, 326 of IPC and also Section 3(1) of Tamil Nadu Prevention of Property Damage and Loss Act.
2.The brief facts of the case as follows:
The defacto complainant was working as a Manager in the firm namely, 'Dr.Kanagasabapathi Naturals' and 'Green Trends'. The appellants herein were the customers of the said Beauty Parlour. Due to previous motive between the parties regarding causing disturbance to the other lady customers, on 05.04.2013, at about 11.15 p.m, when the defacto complainant was proceeding towards his house on his bike along with the collected amount of Rs.45,000/- from the above said firm, the first appellant is said to have waylaid and attacked P.W.1 on his left hand with an iron rod. Thereby, P.W.1 fell down and sustained fracture. The second appellant is said to have attacked P.W.1 with an iron rod on the head and the third appellant attacked P.W.1 on the face and back side with hands and cause
The evidence of an injured witness holds special status and should not be dismissed lightly, especially when corroborated by medical evidence.
The evidence of an injured witness is accorded special status in law, and their testimony is generally reliable unless substantial contradictions are present. The court emphasized the importance of e....
The evidential value of an injured witness and the requirement to prove the accused's intention or knowledge to commit the act are central legal principles established in the judgment.
The court reaffirmed that for a conviction under Section 325 IPC, the prosecution must strictly prove the nature of injuries as defined in Section 320 IPC.
The higher evidentiary value of injured eyewitness testimony and the principle that minor contradictions in eyewitness testimonies, which do not go to the root of the matter, cannot be considered mat....
Injured eyewitness evidence stands on higher pedestal; reliable without corroboration unless improbable. Delay in FIR, hostile witnesses' partial support, and medical/forensic corroboration sustain c....
The conviction of accused based on the reliable testimony of injured witnesses is valid, even without weapon recovery, as their evidence is corroborated by medical records.
The testimony of an injured witness is accorded a special status in law, and the absence of motive does not weaken the case if there is clear and unambiguous direct evidence.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
