Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, R.POORNIMA
K.Thangaraj @ Thangam – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by, The Inspector of Police, Srivilliputhur Town Police Station – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding evidence and credibility. (Para 6 , 8 , 10) |
| 3. court's observations on the evidence presented. (Para 11 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. ratio decidendi regarding the charges and responsibility. (Para 12 , 14 , 21) |
| 5. final conclusion on the appeal's dismissal. (Para 16 , 24) |
JUDGMENT :
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
1.This appeal arises out of the Judgment passed in S.C.No.115 of 2017 dated 23.11.2022 on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, Fast Track Mahila Court, Virudhunagar District @ Srivilliputhur, thereby convicting the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 364 of I.P.C.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the accused and the deceased were relatives and share a brother and sister relationship. The accused had discontinued 12th standard studies and was working as a driver. During her vacation, the deceased went to her native place and, while returning to Gobichettipalayam with her mother, the accused also accompanied them. As a result, the accused and the deceased became acquainted with each other and fell in love. Thereafter, they were also in a sexual relationship. Therefore, the parents warned
The prosecution must prove charges of murder and kidnapping beyond a reasonable doubt, relying on circumstantial evidence and establishing a clear connection to the crime.
The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the appellant's acquittal.
Prosecution must establish motive and a complete chain of circumstantial evidence in murder cases; mere witness testimonies without clear linkage or motive fail to support conviction.
Circumstantial evidence and extra-judicial confessions require strict scrutiny and corroboration for a conviction under murder charges, highlighting their inherent weaknesses.
Dying declarations must be reliable; mere speculation of suicide may lead to alternative charges if harassment is proven.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt; absence of conclusive evidence necessitates acquittal of the accused.
The prosecution failed to establish proof beyond a reasonable doubt, resulting in the acquittal of the accused due to insufficient and unreliable evidence.
In a murder case based on circumstantial evidence, mere last seen testimony is insufficient; a clear chain of circumstances must be established to support a conviction.
The prosecution's reliance on circumstantial evidence and an extra-judicial confession was insufficient to establish murder, leading to a conviction for culpable homicide instead.
Circumstantial evidence must establish a clear chain of events linking the accused to the crime; failure to prove motive or support claims undermines conviction.
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
