Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dr.Justice G.Jayachandran, Ms.Justice R.Poornima, JJ
Karnan – Appellant
Versus
State, rep by The Inspector of Police, Mamsapuram Police Station, Virudhunagar District. (Crime No.304 of 2019) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(G. JAYACHANDRAN, R. POORNIMA, JJ.)
The appellant is the husband of Muthulakshmi (the deceased). He was charged for offence under Section 302 IPC for intentionally causing the death of his wife on 19.09.2009 at about 8.00 am by hitting on her head with a wooden log.
2.The prosecution to substantiate the charge, examined 20 witnesses. Marked 12 documents and 4 material objects. In defence, there was no evidence marked.
3.The Sessions Court at Srivillipudur, on considering the evidence placed and its evidenciary value, held that the accused/appellant guilty of offence under section 302 IPC and convicted him to undergo life imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs 5000/- in default to undergo 6 months Simple Imprisonment.
Case of the prosecution:-
4.Mayakrishnan(PW-1) in his complaint-Ex.P.1 dated 19.09.2009, had informed to the Sub-Inspector of Police, Mamsapuram that his daughter Muthulakshmi married to one Karnan nine years ago and they have two sons and one daughter. He after developing illicit intimacy with a lady by name Muniammal, his son-in-law started torturing his daughter. A month ago, his daughter unbearable of the torture came to the parent home and stayed with them. 10 day
The court affirmed the conviction for murder based on credible eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence, rejecting claims of accidental death.
The court confirmed the conviction under Section 302 IPC, establishing that the evidence of murder was beyond reasonable doubt and rejecting claims of sudden provocation.
The court established that sudden provocation can reduce a murder charge to manslaughter, particularly in domestic disputes.
The reliability of child witness testimony is crucial and must be scrutinized carefully; corroborative evidence is essential for convicting based on such testimony, especially when significant incons....
The court ruled that a conviction based on the testimony of a child witness requires careful scrutiny, and inconsistencies can lead to the benefit of doubt for the accused.
It would always be open for prosecution to decide on quality and quantity of evidence that they wish to lead in order to establish charge and this Court cannot comment on such aspect of matter, as lo....
The court upheld the conviction for murder based on credible eyewitness testimony and medical evidence, affirming that procedural lapses did not undermine the prosecution's case.
The court determined the absence of intent in the accused's actions, modifying the conviction from murder (Section 302 IPC) to causing grievous hurt (Section 326 IPC).
Intent or knowledge to cause death required for murder under Section 302 IPC not established; case qualified under Section 326 IPC.
Conviction under Section 302 RPC unsustainable on uncorroborated child witness testimony with material contradictions, hostile key witnesses, doubtful weapon recovery, and unproved motive, entitling ....
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
