Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for Javed Abdul Rajjaq Shaikh VS State Of Maharashtra...
Checking relevance for Thaman Kumar VS State of Union Territory of Chandigarh...
2003 4 Supreme 206 : In the case discussed, the court addressed the issue of a ligature mark caused by a rolled chadar (cloth) used for strangulation. The court noted that the chadar, when rolled into a rope, could have a diameter much less than 6/7 cm, especially if tightly rolled. The ligature mark on the deceased''''s neck was ½ cm in width, which the court found consistent with a tightly rolled cloth, even though the unrolled chadar was 1 meter wide. The court relied on Modi''''s Medical Jurisprudence (22nd Ed.), which states that ligature marks may be slight or absent if the ligature is soft and yielding (like a scarf or stocking) and removed soon after death. The court concluded that the width of the ligature mark need not exactly match the diameter of the ligature, particularly when the ligature is soft and removed quickly, and that the mark''''s size depends on how tightly the cloth was rolled and the timing of removal. This directly correlates the width of the ligature mark with the nature and handling of the rope-like ligature used in strangulation.Checking relevance for Nazim VS State of Uttarakhand...
Checking relevance for JOSE @ PAPPACHAN VS SUB-INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOYILANDY...
Checking relevance for Jitender Kumar VS State of Haryana...
Checking relevance for Satish Nirankari VS State of Rajasthan...
Checking relevance for Hari @ Harihar Udaybhanji Waghade VS State of Maharashtra, Through Police Officer, Police Station, Wardha...
2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 239 : The postmortem report in the case describes a ligature mark on the anterior aspect of the neck that is 18 cms in length and 2 cms in width, encircling the neck horizontally below the thyroid cartilage. The ligature material used was a green-colored branch of a cotton plant, with a circumference of 31 cms and a diameter of 0.6 cm. The report notes that the width of the ligature mark remains consistent throughout the surface, and the mark is located below the thyroid cartilage, beginning about 10 cms below the chin and ending about 7 cms below the angle of mandible on both sides. The injuries are described as antemortem, with extensive extravasation of blood and contusions corresponding to the ligature mark. The medical officer opined that the cause of death was asphyxial due to strangulation, and the ligature mark''''s width and position are consistent with the use of a soft ligature material such as a branch, which aligns with the characteristics of rope-like injuries in strangulation cases. The document also confirms that in ligature strangulation, the ligature typically encircles the neck completely, and the width and depth of the mark correlate with the diameter of the ligature used.Checking relevance for Vinod Kumar Keshri @ Binod Kumar Keshari, son of late Durga Prasad Keshri VS State of Jharkhand...
2023 0 Supreme(Jhk) 1276 : The judgment discusses rope injuries during strangulation, specifically noting that in homicidal strangulation, ligature marks are typically horizontal or transverse, continuous around the neck, and located low down below the thyroid cartilage. It further states that in suicidal hanging, the ligature mark may not be continuous because the knot tends to rise upward due to the mechanics of self-hanging. The document also references medical jurisprudence (Parikh''''s and Modi''''s Textbooks) indicating that in homicidal strangulation, ligature marks are usually continuous, round, and low on the neck, and may be accompanied by abrasions, ecchymoses, and fractures of the larynx, trachea, or hyoid bone. While the width of the ligature mark is not explicitly quantified, the description of the mark''''s continuity, position, and associated injuries provides a basis for correlating the nature of the injury with the cause of death. The case specifically mentions two ligature marks on the neck: one horizontal and backward from the front below the thyroid cartilage, and another oblique mark above the first on the left side, extending to the angle of the jaw—consistent with a rope injury in a homicidal context.Checking relevance for Sarjerao VS State of Maharashtra...
Checking relevance for Raju @ Rajendra Baliram Borse VS State of Maharashtra...
2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 601 : The judgment discusses rope injuries during strangulation, specifically mentioning ligature marks on the neck. Autopsy doctor PW6 Dr. Babulal Banga Barela testified that he observed two ligature marks on the deceased: one below the chin and another on the thyroid cartilage. He noted that these marks were not indicative of being caused while the person was alive, and that injury nos. 1 and 2 were antemortem in nature. The doctor also clarified that injury nos. 3 and 4 were possible with a rope, and that the shape of the second ligature mark was oblique and round. While the document does not explicitly state the width of the ligature marks, it does correlate the presence and characteristics of the marks (including their shape and location) with the use of a rope, and distinguishes them from marks caused by other means. The court relied on this medical evidence to conclude that the death was homicidal, not suicidal, based in part on the nature and distribution of these injuries.Checking relevance for Ramakant Meghnath Patil Vs The State Of Maharashtra...
Checking relevance for Maroti VS State of Maharashtra...
2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 2006 : The case discusses a strangulation injury involving a ligature (referred to as ''''Article No.1'''' and a ''''Kulai'''' or cap) used around the neck of a three-month-old infant. The postmortem report noted two strangulation marks with a distance of 0.3 cm between them. The expert witness, Dr. Maroti Dake, stated that the ligature used was approximately 3 to 4 inches wide, but this width was not recorded in the postmortem report. The court highlighted that the width of the ligature mark (maximum 1.00 cm on the right side of the neck) did not correspond to the 3 to 4 inch width claimed by the expert. The prosecution failed to produce the actual Kulai (cap) for examination, which could have confirmed whether the ligature marks matched the suspected instrument. The court emphasized that the absence of the physical evidence (the Kulai) and the lack of correlation between the expert’s opinion and the actual marks undermined the prosecution’s case. This case thus addresses the importance of correlating the width of ligature marks with the actual instrument used, and the necessity of producing physical evidence for proper forensic comparison.
