TITLE: RAMALINGAM & ORS… V. N. VISWANATHAN
CITATION: CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 212 OF 2024
DECIDED ON: 18 JANUARY 2024
CORAM: JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA, JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
Facts of the Case
A criminal appeal (No. 212 of 2024) is at issue in this case before the Indian Supreme Court. The appellants, Ramalingam & Ors., contest a December 20, 2018, ruling and decree rendered by a single judge of the Madras High Court of Judicature. On January 9, 2009, the appellants were discharged by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Salem, in accordance with Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C).The Indian Penal Code (IPC) accused the appellants of violating Sections 341, 323, and 302 on the basis of a First Information Report (FIR) that the deceased’s husband (Nanjundan) submitted.
Legal Provisions:
Section 227 of Cr.P.C: Empowers the court to discharge the accused if it considers that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against them. Sections 341, 323, and 302 of IPC: Relate to offenses of wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing hurt, and murder, respectively. Section 200 of Cr.P.C: Deals with the examination of the complainant and witnesses by the Magistrate in cases of private complaints.
Issues Involved:
The primary issue is the validity of the judgment and order of the High Court, which set aside the discharge order and remanded the case for trial. The appellant argues that the evidence does not support the charges, while the respondent contends that a full trial is necessary to determine guilt.
Court’s Observation and Analysis
According to the High Court, the lower court held a mini-trial. The Supreme Court determined that the lower court had not held a mini-trial and had instead operated within the parameters of Section 227. One important component was the post-mortem certificate. The doctor’s testimony stated that the death was caused by a tear in the heart caused by a pre-existing heart ailment, and the certificate showed no ante-mortem damage. The doctor’s evidence, which bolstered the hypothesis of natural death, was ruled to have been disregarded by the High Court. It was underlined that the deceased’s body had no visible wounds. The respondent’s father’s account was found to be unsupported by evidence, and the court observed that the incident resulted from a property dispute. The High Court’s decision was overturned by the Supreme Court, which also reinstated the Additional District and Sessions Judge’s ruling and granted the appeal. This decision emphasizes how crucial it is to carefully review the medical evidence and the circumstances before moving forward with a study.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Komal Goswami
