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

1988 Supreme(Mad) 120

DAVID ANNOUSSAMY
Noble Mohandass – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:N. T. Vanamamalai, Gopinath, K. Selvarangam, T. Munirathnam Naidu, Advocates.

Judgment :-

This is revision petition by the accused. The accused is the husband and the complaint P.W. 1 is his wife. The accused is a clerk under the Railways department, living at Podanur. P.W. 1 is a teacher living at Madurai. Of the wedlock, they had two children who are now living with their mother. Both the husband and wife were living together till 23rd September, 1983.

2. The elder brother of P.W. 1, who is a Christian married on 24-1-1973 a Muslim girl, nurse by profession. The whole family was against that marriage. But the accused gave his blessings to the marriage and even signed the document evidencing the same. On 4-9-1983, the elder brother of P.W. 1 contracted another marriage. A complaint of bigamy was filed by the first wife who has been examined in this case as D.W. 1 and in that complaint the first wife cited the accused as one of the witnesses to be examined.

3. Under the circumstances, the case of the prosecution is that, the husband came all of a sudden on 1-11-1983, to the house of the wife, beat her, fisted her on the left cheek, dashed her against the wall several times, squeezed her neck. He was prevented from inflicting further injuries by P.Ws. 3 and 4,







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