{"id":144183,"date":"2008-03-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-03-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008"},"modified":"2014-12-26T09:12:15","modified_gmt":"2014-12-26T03:42:15","slug":"james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008","title":{"rendered":"James vs State Rep. By on 6 March, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
James vs State Rep. By on 6 March, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED : 06\/03\/2008\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM\nAND\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.PALANIVELU\n\nCRL.A.(MD) No.653 of 2007\n\nJames\t\t\t\t\t.. Appellant\n\nvs\n\nState rep. by\nDeputy Superintendent of Police\nBalaviduthi Police Station\nKarur Dist.\n(Cr.No.24 of 2002)\t\t\t.. Respondent\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\n\n\tCriminal appeals preferred under Sec.374(2) of Cr.P.C. against the\njudgment of the Principal Sessions Judge, Karur, made in S.C.No.102 of 2003\ndated 31.7.2007.\n\n\n!For Appellant\t\t...  Mr.R.Shanmugasundaram\n\t\t\t       Senior Counsel\n\t\t\t\tfor Mr.S.Ravi\n\n^For Respondent\t\t...  Mr.V.Kasinathan\n\t\t\t   Additional Public Prosecutor\n\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.)<\/p>\n
\tChallenge is made to a judgment of the Principal Sessions Division, Karur,
\nmade in S.C.NO.102 of 2003 whereby the sole accused\/appellant stood charged,
\ntried and found guilty as follows:\n<\/p>\n
CHARGES
\nGUILTY
\nSENTENCE
\n354 IPC
\nNot guilty<\/p>\n
3(1)(xi) S.C.\/S.T. Act
\nNot guilty<\/p>\n
376 IPC
\nGuilty
\n7 years RI and a fine of Rs.1000\/- i\/d 6 months RI
\n3(2)(v) SC\/ST Act
\nGuilty
\nLife imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1000\/- i.d. 6 months RI
\n323 IPC
\nNot guilty<\/p>\n
506(2) IPC
\nNot guilty<\/p>\n
\t2.The short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated
\nthus:\n<\/p>\n
\t(a) P.W.1 is the wife of P.W.2.  They were living at Old Maniyarampatti.
\nThey belonged to Chakkaliar community, which would be coming under the S.C.\/S.T.
\n(Prevention of Atrocities) Act.  They were doing coolie work.  On 14.5.2002 at
\nabout 11.00 a.m., as usual she went to Ponnanaiyaru Dam for taking firewood.  At
\nthat time, the accused\/appellant met her and informed her that she could go
\nnearby Semmalai Adivaram where she could pick firewood.  Accordingly, he took
\nher.  When she was found aloof, he pushed her down and committed sexual assault
\ndespite her resistance.  She raised distressing cry.  P.Ws.3 and 4 who were
\nnearby, also heard the same.  They advised her immediately to go to the place
\nand inform to the relatives.  Accordingly, she returned and informed to P.W.2,
\nher husband, and accompanied by P.W.2, she went to the Panchayat President and
\nothers.  On their advice, they proceeded to the respondent police station. On
\n18.5.2002 at about 12 Noon, when P.W.10, the Inspector of Police of the
\nrespondent police station, was on duty, she gave Ex.P1, the report, on the
\nstrength of which a case came to be registered in Crime No.24 of 2002 under
\nSections 376(b) and 506(2) of IPC.  The printed FIR, Ex.P10, was despatched to
\nthe Court.  She also produced M.Os.1 to 3, the clothes, which were worn by her
\nat the time of occurrence.\n<\/p>\n
\t(b) The Investigator, P.W.10, took up investigation, proceeded to the
\nscene of occurrence, made an inspection and prepared a rough sketch, Ex.P11.
\nShe was also sent to the Government Hospital for medical examination.  P.W.9,
\nthe Doctor, medically examined her and also gave a certificate which is found in
\nEx.P7.  Pending the investigation, the accused was arrested on 21.6.2002 at
\nabout 3.00 a.m., at Maniyarampatti Road junction, and he was also sent for
\nmedical examination.  P.W.8, the Doctor, examined him and found him to be
\npotent.  A certificate was issued to him which is marked as Ex.P6. Further, on
\ncoming to know that she belonged to S.C. community, a certificate was obtained
\nfrom the Tahsildar.\n<\/p>\n
\t(c) The case was taken up for further investigation by P.W.12, the Deputy
\nSuperintendent of Police of the concerned division, who further proceeded with
\nthe investigation and filed the final report on completion of the investigation,
\nunder Sections 376, 506(1) and 323 of IPC and Sec.3(1)(xi) of SC\/ST (Prevention
\nof Atrocities) Act.\n<\/p>\n
\t3.The case was committed to Court of Sessions, and necessary charges were
\nframed.  In order to substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined 12
\nwitnesses and also relied on 12 exhibits and 3 material objects.  On completion
\nof the evidence on the side of the prosecution, the accused was questioned under
\nSec.313 of Cr.P.C. as to the incriminating circumstances found in the evidence
\nof the prosecution witnesses, which he flatly denied as false.  No defence
\nwitness was examined.  The trial Court heard the arguments advanced and also
\nlooked into the materials available.  After doing so, it found the
\nappellant\/accused guilty as per the charges and awarded punishment as referred
\nto above, which is the subject matter of challenge before this Court.\n<\/p>\n
\t4.Advancing arguments on behalf of the appellant, the learned Senior
\nCounsel Mr.R.Shanmugasundaram made the following submissions:\n<\/p>\n
\t(i) The prosecution was successful enough in proving the fact that the
\nalleged victim belonged to the scheduled caste community by furnishing a
\ncertificate thereto.\n<\/p>\n
\t(ii) It was a case where the prosecution relied upon the evidence of
\nP.W.1, the victim.  Even her husband P.W.2, was treated hostile.  P.Ws.3 and 4,
\nwho, according to P.W.1, saw the occurrence, have also turned hostile, and thus,
\nthe entire case is rested upon the evidence of P.W.1.  The Court can sustain a
\nconviction merely on the evidence of P.W.1 provided if it is reliable and
\nacceptable.  In the instant case, there are number of circumstances pointing to
\nthe fact that her evidence was thoroughly false, and the entire complaint itself
\nwas with a view to get the monetary benefit from the Government.\n<\/p>\n
\t(iii) According to Ex.P1, her marriage took place two years prior to the
\noccurrence; but, at the time of the examination before the Court, she has
\ncategorically admitted that her marriage took place before eight years.  Even
\nher evidence would clearly reveal that she lived with P.W.2 for a period of one
\nyear, and thereafter, she was living for sometime with one Subramanian who is
\nthe younger brother of P.W.2, on marriage.  During the relevant period, when she
\nwas examined in Court, she has well admitted that she was living with one
\nAundiappan, her sister’s husband.  All would go to show that even the allegation
\nthat P.W.2 was her husband was nothing but a falsehood.\n<\/p>\n
\t(iv) According to her, at the time of occurrence, P.Ws.3 and 4 were very
\nwell available, and they also witnessed the occurrence, and immediately, they
\nadvised her to go to the place and inform to the villagers.  A reading of Ex.P1
\ndoes not disclose the presence of either P.W.3 or P.W.4.  In such circumstances,
\nit is highly improbable that such an occurrence has taken place.\n<\/p>\n
\t(v) In view of the sexual assault, one would naturally expect her to
\nimmediately go to the village, get the assistance of others and then go to the
\npolice station.  The alleged occurrence has taken place on 14.5.2002; but, the
\ncomplaint was given only on 18.5.2002.  Thus, there was a delay of 4 days.  In a
\ncase of rape, such a delay was inordinate.  But, no explanation was forthcoming.
\nOn the contrary, she has well admitted that the accused was brought to the
\nvillage, and he was enquired even before the complaint was lodged.  But,
\naccording to the Investigator, the accused was arrested later when he gave a
\nconfessional statement and was sent for judicial remand.\n<\/p>\n
\t(vi) According to her, she was pushed down and she sustained an injury on
\nthe nose, and she has got injuries in 4 or 5 places, and two were bleeding
\ninjuries.  But, nothing is available to substantiate the same either by medical
\nevidence or by any other evidence.  Hence, it would thoroughly falsify that part
\nof the case.\n<\/p>\n
\t(vii) Further, P.W.9, the Doctor, who medically examined her, has given a
\ncategorical opinion that there was no indication of rape found therein.\n<\/p>\n
\t(viii) In the instant case, she came out with a story to state that she
\nhas got menstrual period.  The lower Court has also pointed out that there was
\nmenstrual period, and semen could not be found out.  But, in the instant case,
\nthe lower Court has not pointed out that the menstrual period has taken place
\npreceding the occurrence.  Under the circumstances in the absence of any
\nsymptoms of sexual assault, such an occurrence could not have taken place at
\nall.\n<\/p>\n
\t(ix) It is true that P.W.2 has been examined before the Court.  When he
\nwas examined, he was treated hostile.  But, his evidence was available to
\nindicate that on the date of occurrence, he was not available in the village;
\nthat when he returned to the village next day, she was found weeping; and that
\nwhen questioned, she informed him that it was the accused who assaulted her when
\nshe went over to take firewood.  At that juncture, the evidence of P.W.2 would
\nclearly indicate that this was only manipulated.\n<\/p>\n
\t(x) Further, though the complaint was given on 18.5.2002, the material
\nobjects were recovered on 20.5.2002.  But, Ex.P1, the complaint, would reveal
\nthat M.O.1, blouse, M.O.2, saree, and M.O.3, petticoat, were all produced along
\nwith Ex.P1.  If to be so, they should have been recovered on 18.5.2002 itself.
\nBut, Form 95 would indicate that they were all recovered only on 20.5.2002; but,
\nthey were not produced on that day.  When Form 95 was filed before the Court on
\n20.5.2002, it has been returned by the Court stating that it must be presented
\nalong with the material objects.  It is curious to note that all these material
\nobjects were placed before the Court only on 4.7.2002, and these material
\nobjects were not at all sent for analysis.\n<\/p>\n
\t(xi) It is pertinent to note that it was nothing but a false case, and it
\nwas only for the purpose of getting monetary benefit.  P.W.1 has well admitted
\nthat she got the amount of Rs.25,000\/- from the State Government, and the
\nbalance of Rs.75,000\/- is to be paid by the Government.  All would go to show
\nthat it was nothing but a false case and for monetary benefit.  No one of the
\nabove aspects has been considered by the trial Court; but, it found him guilty,
\nand hence, he is entitled for acquittal in the hands of this Court.\n<\/p>\n
\t5.The Court heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the above
\ncontentions and made its anxious consideration on the submissions made.\n<\/p>\n
\t6.The gist of the case of the prosecution as could be seen from the
\nmaterials placed before the Court, was that P.W.1, the wife of P.W.2, went for
\ntaking firewood on 14.5.2002 at about 11.00 a.m., at Ponnainaiyaru Dam where on
\nmeeting her, the accused told her that she could pick firewood only from
\nSemmalai Adivaram, and so saying he took her there,  pushed her down and
\nforcibly committed sexual assault.  It is the further case of the prosecution
\nthat the same was known to P.Ws.3 and 4, and on their advice, she came back to
\nthe village and informed to P.W.2 and then gave a complaint on 18.5.2002, and it
\nwas proceeded accordingly.  It is well settled proposition of law that in a case
\nof rape, the Court need not look for any corroboration.  The Court is mindful of
\nthe decision of the Apex Court reported in 2006(1) MLJ (CRL.) 52 (STATE OF M.P.
\nV. DAYAL SAHU),<\/a> wherein it has been held thus:\n<\/p>\n
“A plethora of decisions by this Court as referred to above would show that once
\nthe statement of the prosecutrix inspires confidence and is accepted by the
\nCourts as such, conviction can be based only on the solitary evidence of the
\nprosecutrix, unless there are compelling reasons and no corroboration would be
\nrequired unless there are compelling reasons which necessitate the Courts for
\ncorroboration of her statement.  Corroboration of testimony of the proseecutrix
\nas a condition for judicial reliance is not a requirement of law but a guidance
\nof prudence under the given facts and circumstances. It is also noticed that
\nminor contradictions or insignificant discrepancies should not be a ground for
\nthrowing out an otherwise reliable prosecution case.  Non-examination of the
\ndoctor and non-production of doctor’s report would not be fatal to the
\nprosecution case, if the statements of the prosecutrix and other prosecution
\nwitnesses inspire confidence.  It is also noticed that the court while
\nacquitting the accused on benefit of doubt should be cautious to see that the
\ndoubt should be a reasonable doubt and it should not reverse the findings of the
\nguilt on the basis of irrelevant circumstances or mere technicalities.\n<\/p>\n
\t7.From the very reading of the above decision, it would be quite clear
\nthat in a case of rape, the Court need not look for any corroboration and can
\nsustain a conviction on the solitary and uncorroborated testimony of the
\nprosecutrix.; but, the evidence of the prosecutrix must inspire the confidence
\nof the Court.  If it does not inspire the confidence of the Court, there was no
\noption for the Court than to acquit the accused. In the instant case,
\ncircumstances are so many which would caste doubt on the evidence of P.W.1.\n<\/p>\n
\t8.The first line of the FIR would start that her marriage took place
\nbefore two years with P.W.2.  The evidence given by her before the Court, was
\nthat her marriage took place 8 years before with P.W.2; that she lived with him
\nonly for one year; that thereafter, she married one Subramanian, the younger
\nbrother of P.W.2; and that during the relevant period, when she was examined
\nbefore the Court, she was living with one Aundiappan, her sister’s husband.
\nThis part of the evidence would clearly indicate that she was not the wife of
\nP.W.2 at the time of evidence at all.\n<\/p>\n
\t9.The next circumstance is that the evidence would  indicate that in the
\nnearby place of occurrence, P.Ws.3 and 4 were present, and they heard the
\ndistressing cry of P.W.1, and further, they advised her to go to the village and
\ninform the villagers.  But, nowhere it is stated in Ex.P1, the report, as to the
\npresence of P.Ws.3 and 4 at all.  P.W.1 has deposed before the Court that she
\nsustained an injury on her nose and on the backside including a bleeding injury
\nalso. But, no corresponding medical evidence is available. All would go to show
\nthat not only they are exaggerations, but also they are nothing but false.\n<\/p>\n
\t10.As far as the alleged commission of rape by the accused is concerned,
\nshe was examined by P.W.9, the Medical Person, on 21.5.2002, and the Doctor has
\ngiven a certificate that there is no evidence of any external injuries and no
\nevidence of sperms, wherefrom it cannot even be inferred that the rape could
\nhave been committed on her.  The explanation sought to be tendered by the
\nprosecution, was that after the commission of rape, she had the menstrual
\nperiod, and hence, semen could not be found out.  This cannot be accepted for
\nthe following reasons.  Firstly, according to the evidence, the menstrual period
\nwas 4 days prior to the occurrence.  Further, the occurrence has taken place on
\n14.5.2002.  She has given the  complaint on 18.5.2002.  If to be so, why she was
\nexamined by the Doctor on 21.5.2002, no explanation is offered.  Had it been
\ntrue that such a rape has taken place, there is all possibility of any symptoms
\nthat could be easily fixed by testing the clothes.  While the occurrence has
\ntaken place on 14.5.2002, she has given the complaint on 18.5.2002 after a
\nperiod of four days.  According to Ex.P1, the report, M.Os.1 to 3, blouse, saree
\nand petticoat respectively, were produced along with Ex.P1.  But, Form 95 would
\nindicate that they were recovered only on 20.5.2002.  When Form 95 was presented
\nbefore the Court, it was without the material objects.  The Court has returned
\nit for production along with the material objects.  But, curiously the material
\nobjects were produced only on 4.7.2002, for the reasons best known to the
\nInvestigator.\n<\/p>\n
\t11.Added circumstance is that all these material objects were not at all
\nplaced for chemical analysis.  All would go to show not only a flaw in
\ninvestigation, but also false part of the prosecution case.\n<\/p>\n
\t12.Apart from the above, she has candidly admitted in her evidence that
\nthe accused was brought to the village and enquired by the police even before
\nthe complaint was given, and it becomes doubtful whether Ex.P1 has come into
\nexistence as put forth by the prosecution.\n<\/p>\n
\t13.As far as the evidence of P.W.2 is concerned, though he was treated
\nhostile, he has categorically stated that on the day of occurrence, he was
\nabsent, and on the next day, he was informed by P.W.1 that she was assaulted by
\nthe accused.  Now, all would go to show that not only the evidence of P.W.1 was
\nnot corroborated by the medical evidence, but also all attendant circumstances
\nwould clearly reveal that it was nothing but false evidence.  As pointed out by
\nthe learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, a suggestion was also made to the
\nwitness by way of question before the lower Court that the case itself was only
\nfoisted for the purpose of getting the monetary benefit from the Government. She
\nhas well admitted in the cross-examination that she has received the amount from
\nthe State Government.  In such circumstances, it was not a case where the Court
\neither by direct evidence or by circumstances attendant could even infer that
\nsuch an occurrence could have taken place.  The lower Court should have
\nacquitted the accused.  Hence, the judgment of the lower Court has got to be
\nmade undone only by upsetting the same.  Accordingly, it is set aside, and the
\nappellant is acquitted of all the charges levelled against him.  He is directed
\nto be set at liberty forthwith unless his presence is required in connection
\nwith any other case.  The fine amount if any paid by him, will be refunded to
\nhim.\n<\/p>\n
\t14.In the result, this criminal appeal is allowed.\n<\/p>\n
nsv\/<\/p>\n
To:\n<\/p>\n
1.The Principal Sessions Judge
\n  Karur\n<\/p>\n
2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police
\n  Balaviduthi Police Station
\n  Karur Dist.\n<\/p>\n
  (Cr.No.24 of 2002)\n<\/p>\n
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor
\n  Madurai Bench of Madras High Court<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court James vs State Rep. By on 6 March, 2008 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 06\/03\/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.PALANIVELU CRL.A.(MD) No.653 of 2007 James .. Appellant vs State rep. by Deputy Superintendent of Police Balaviduthi Police Station Karur Dist. (Cr.No.24 of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-144183","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nJames vs State Rep. By on 6 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"James vs State Rep. By on 6 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-03-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-12-26T03:42:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"James vs State Rep. By on 6 March, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-03-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-26T03:42:15+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2901,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008\",\"name\":\"James vs State Rep. By on 6 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-03-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-26T03:42:15+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"James vs State Rep. By on 6 March, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"James vs State Rep. By on 6 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"James vs State Rep. By on 6 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-03-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-12-26T03:42:15+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"James vs State Rep. By on 6 March, 2008","datePublished":"2008-03-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-26T03:42:15+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008"},"wordCount":2901,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008","name":"James vs State Rep. By on 6 March, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-03-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-26T03:42:15+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/james-vs-state-rep-by-on-6-march-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"James vs State Rep. By on 6 March, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/144183","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=144183"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/144183\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=144183"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=144183"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=144183"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}