{"id":173718,"date":"2005-08-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-08-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005"},"modified":"2015-04-07T17:29:19","modified_gmt":"2015-04-07T11:59:19","slug":"ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005","title":{"rendered":"Ravi vs State Rep. By on 11 August, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Ravi vs State Rep. By on 11 August, 2005<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS           \n\nDATED: 11\/08\/2005  \n\nCORAM   \n\nTHE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE  N.DHINAKAR        \nand \nTHE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE  M.CHOCKALINGAM           \n\nCrl.A. No. 206 of 2000\n\nRavi                                   ... Appellant\n\n-Vs-\n\nState rep. by\nInspector of Police,\nIdapadi Police Station,\nEdapadi, Salem.                         ... Respondent\n\n\n        Prayer:   Appeal  against the judgment passed by the learned Principal\nDistrict Sessions Judge, Salem, in S.C.No.  59 of 1999 dated :  23.1 2.1999.\n\n!For Appellant  :  Mr.V.Parthiban for\n                M\/s.P.Jagadeesan\n\n^For Respondent :  Mr.V.M.R.Rajendran  \n                Addl.  Public Prosecutor.\n\n:JUDGMENT   \n<\/pre>\n<p>(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.CHOCKALINGAM,J)    <\/p>\n<p>        This  appeal  has  been  brought  forth by the sole accused, who stood<br \/>\ntried and found guilty as per the charge of murder, by the Court of  Sessions,<br \/>\nSalem, in S.C.No.59 of 1999.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.   The  short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be<br \/>\nstated thus:-\n<\/p>\n<p>i.P.W.1 is the mother of the deceased.  The appellant\/accused is  the  husband<br \/>\nof the  deceased.    P.W.2  is  their  son  aged  about 8 years at the time of<br \/>\noccurrence.  P.W.1 had two daughters.    The  second  daughter  was  given  in<br \/>\nmarriage to  the  appellant\/accused  herein.    The deceased was employed as a<br \/>\npermanent worker in Idapadi Municipality, while the  appellant\/accused  was  a<br \/>\ndaily wage  earner  in that Municipality.  P.W.1 was living with her daughter,<br \/>\nthe deceased, during the relevant time.\n<\/p>\n<p>ii.One day prior to the date of occurrence,  i.e.,  on  16.4.1998,  a  quarrel<br \/>\narose  between  the  spouses, since the appellant was insisting for a separate<br \/>\nresidence and later, all of them went for sleeping.  P.W.1 was lying  out  the<br \/>\nhouse.   On 17.4.1998 at about 4.30 a.m., the deceased went to attend calls of<br \/>\nnature and later, came back to the house.   At  that  time,  P.W.1  heard  the<br \/>\ndistressed cries  of  her  daughter inside the house.  When she looked inside,<br \/>\nshe found the accused sitting on the chest of his wife and  cutting  her  neck<br \/>\nwith M.O.1 knife.   This was also witnessed by P.W.2.  P.W.3, the neighbour of<br \/>\nthe spouses, on hearing the distressed cries of  the  deceased,  went  to  her<br \/>\nhouse  and saw the appellant running from the house with a blood-stained knife<br \/>\nin his hand.\n<\/p>\n<p>iii.On seeing the death of  her  daughter,  P.W.1  rushed  to  Idapadi  Police<br \/>\nStation at 6.00 a.m., where P.W.9, the Sub Inspector of Police, was on duty at<br \/>\nthat time.    She  gave  a complaint under Ex.P-1 to P.W.9, on the strength of<br \/>\nwhich, a case came to be registered in Crime No.41 4 of 1998 under Section 302<br \/>\nIPC.  The express first information report under Ex.P-14 was sent to Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>iv.P.W.10, the Inspector of Police, Magudanchavadi  Police  Station,  took  up<br \/>\ninvestigation in  the  case.  He proceeded to the scene of occurrence, made an<br \/>\ninspection in the presence  of  two  witnesses  and  prepared  an  observation<br \/>\nmahazar under  Ex.P-1  and  drew  a  rough sketch under Ex.P-15.  He conducted<br \/>\ninquest over the dead body in the presence of witnesses and Panchayatdars  and<br \/>\nprepared the  inquest report under Ex.P-16.  He recovered M.O.5, blood-stained<br \/>\nearth and M.O.6, sample earth, under a Ex.P-3 mahazar.   Thereafter,  he  sent<br \/>\nthe dead body along with a requisition to the doctor for conducting autopsy.\n<\/p>\n<p>v.On  receipt  of  the  requisition,  P.W.6,  Assistant  Surgeon  attached  to<br \/>\nGovernment Hospital, Idapadi, Salem, conducted autopsy on  the  dead  body  of<br \/>\nSaraswathy and found the following injuries:-\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;An  incised  wound  in  the front of the neck from left to right below larynx<br \/>\nwith 10 cm x 3 cm to bone depth.  Wound lapse in the right side.   Trachea  is<br \/>\ncut, open.   Neck  muscles  and  neck  blood  vessels incised.  Lower cervical<br \/>\nvertebra exposed.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>The doctor has issued the post-mortem certificate under Ex.P-7, wherein he has<br \/>\nopined that the deceased died out of shock and haemorrhage.\n<\/p>\n<p>vi.During   investigation,   the   investigating    officer    arrested    the<br \/>\nappellant\/accused on  17.4.1998  at  4.30  p.m.    He  volunteered  to  give a<br \/>\nconfessional statement, which was recorded in the presence of  two  witnesses.<br \/>\nThe  admissible  part  is  marked under Ex.P-4, pursuant to which, the accused<br \/>\nproduced M.O.1, knife, which  was  recovered  in  the  presence  of  the  same<br \/>\nwitnesses under Ex.P-5 mahazar.  Thereafter, the accused was sent to Court for<br \/>\nremand.\n<\/p>\n<p>vii.Further  investigation  was  taken  up by P.W.11, the Inspector of Police,<br \/>\nIdapadi Police Station, on 3.5.1998.  All the material objects recovered  from<br \/>\nthe  place of occurrence, from the dead body, and M.O.1, knife, recovered from<br \/>\nthe accused pursuant  to  his  confession  statement  were  all  subjected  to<br \/>\nchemical  analysis  by  the  Forensic  Department  with  a  requisition by the<br \/>\nconcerned Judicial Magistrate, as a result of which, Ex.P-10,  the  report  of<br \/>\nthe Chemical Analyst, and Ex.P-11, the report of the Serologist, were received<br \/>\nby the  Court.    The investigating officer questioned the doctor and P.W.6 on<br \/>\n7.6.1998 and after the completion of investigation, the final report was filed<br \/>\nagainst the accused\/appellant on the same day.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.  The case was committed to the Court of Session.  Necessary charges<br \/>\nwere framed against the appellant\/accused by the trial Court and in  order  to<br \/>\nsubstantiate  the  charges  levelled  against  him, the prosecution marched 11<br \/>\nwitnesses and relied  on  16  exhibits  and  12  material  objects.    On  the<br \/>\ncompletion  of  evidence  on  the  side  of  the  prosecution, the accused was<br \/>\nquestioned under  Section  313  of  the  Cr.P.C.    as  to  the  incriminating<br \/>\ncircumstances found  in  the evidence of the witnesses.  He flatly denied them<br \/>\nas false.  No defence witness was examined.  On hearing both sides and on  the<br \/>\nscrutiny   of   the   materials   available,   the   trial   Court  found  the<br \/>\naccused\/appellant guilty as per the  charge  and  awarded  life  imprisonment,<br \/>\nwhich is the subject matter of challenge in this appeal before this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.   The  learned counsel appearing for the appellant inter alia would<br \/>\nsubmit that the prosecution has not proved the case beyond  reasonable  doubt.<br \/>\nAccording  to  the prosecution, P.W.1 is the mother of the deceased and P.W.2,<br \/>\nwho was aged about 8 years at the time  of  occurrence,  is  the  son  of  the<br \/>\naccused\/appellant  and  deceased,  The occurrence has taken place at 4.30 a.m.<br \/>\non 17.04.1998 and at that time, she was lying out side the  house.    At  4.30<br \/>\na.m.,  she  saw the deceased coming out of the house to attend calls of nature<br \/>\nand went  back  to  her  house.    Immediately  thereafter,  P.W.1  heard  the<br \/>\ndistressed  cries  of her daughter and when she entered the house, she saw the<br \/>\naccused\/ appellant sitting over the chest of her daughter and cutting the neck<br \/>\nwith a knife.  According to her, the occurrence was also witnessed  by  P.W.2.<br \/>\nThe  learned  counsel  would submit that since P.W.2 was aged about 8 years at<br \/>\nthe time of occurrence, the tr ial Court ought to have rejected  the  evidence<br \/>\nof P.W.2.    Apart  from  that,  since P.Ws.1 and 2 are close relatives of the<br \/>\ndeceased, much credence should not be placed on their evidence at all.   Added<br \/>\nfurther   the   learned   Counsel   that   P.W.3   could  not  have  seen  the<br \/>\naccused\/appellant running from the place of occurrence,  since  it  was  dark.<br \/>\nAccording  to  P.W.3, who is the neighbour, at about 4.30 a.m., on hearing the<br \/>\ndistress cries from the house of the deceased, he went towards  the  house  of<br \/>\nthe  deceased  and  saw  the  accused\/appellant  running from the house with a<br \/>\nblood-stained knife in his house.  The learned counsel would further add  that<br \/>\neven  assuming  that  the  prosecution  has  proved  its  case that it was the<br \/>\naccused\/appellant, who stabbed his wife,  the  act  of  the  accused\/appellant<br \/>\nwould not come within the ambit of murder, since there was a quarrel preceding<br \/>\nthe occurrence and in such circumstances, due to the preceding quarrel between<br \/>\nthe  parties  and  due  to  sudden  provocation, the accused has committed the<br \/>\nmurder of the deceased and hence, he has to be given the benefit of any of the<br \/>\nExceptions to Section 300 IPC.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.  The Court heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing<br \/>\nfor the State on the above contentions.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.  It is not in controversy that the wife  of  the  appellant\/accused<br \/>\nmet  with  instantaneous  death  in  the place of occurrence and following the<br \/>\ninquest conducted by the investigating officer,  the  body  was  subjected  to<br \/>\npost-mortem and the doctor P.W.6, who conducted post-mortem and who issued the<br \/>\npost-mortem certificate under Ex.P-7, has opined that the deceased died out of<br \/>\nshock and  haemorrhage  about 6 to 8 hours prior to autopsy.  Apart from that,<br \/>\nthe fact that the deceased  died  out  of  homicidal  violence  was  also  not<br \/>\ndisputed  by  the  accused\/  appellant either before the trial Court or before<br \/>\nthis Court.  Hence, it could safely be concluded that the deceased died out of<br \/>\nhomicidal violence.\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.  In order to establish  that  it  was  the  accused\/appellant,  who<br \/>\ncommitted  the  crime, the prosecution has placed reliance on three witnesses,<br \/>\nviz., P.Ws.1 to 3.  It is true that P.W.1 was the mother and P.  W.2  was  the<br \/>\nson of  the deceased.  But from the evidence of P.W.1, it is not disputed that<br \/>\nduring the relevant time and in  particular,  the  relevant  date,  P.W.1  was<br \/>\nstaying along  with  both the deceased and the accused\/appellant.  There is no<br \/>\nreason or circumstance brought forth to reject her evidence.  Apart from that,<br \/>\nthe lower Court has  also  clearly  decided  the  maturity  of  the  child  as<br \/>\nacceptable  and  has  rightly  accepted the evidence given by the said witness<br \/>\nalso.  It is pertinent to point out that P.W.2 is not only the  child  of  the<br \/>\ndeceased,  but also the child of the accused and no reason is brought forth to<br \/>\nsuspect the said evidence.    Apart  from  that,  P.W.3,  the  neighbour,  has<br \/>\ncategorically deposed that on hearing the distressed cries of the deceased, he<br \/>\nimmediately  went  towards  the  house  of  the  accused\/appellant and saw the<br \/>\naccused running from the  house  with  a  blood-stained  knife  in  his  hand.<br \/>\nAccording to  him,  the  occurrence  has  taken place at 4.30 a.m.  and in the<br \/>\nhouse of  the  accused\/appellant.    It  is  also  not   disputed   that   the<br \/>\naccused\/appellant  was  staying  with  his  wife on the date of occurrence, in<br \/>\nparticular, during the relevant time and hence, he has to explain  as  to  how<br \/>\nhis wife  was murdered, which he failed to adduce before the lower Court.  But<br \/>\nhe would simply said that he had no knowledge.  It has to be pointed out  that<br \/>\na  case  has  been registered within a short time from the time of occurrence,<br \/>\ni.e., at 6.00 a.m.  and immediately thereafter,  investigation  was  proceeded<br \/>\nwith.  In the instant case, the medical evidence fully corroborates the ocular<br \/>\ntestimony.   Under such circumstances, th e Court is of the considered opinion<br \/>\nthat the lower Court was perfectly correct in taking the view that it was  the<br \/>\naccused, who committed the murder of his wife.\n<\/p>\n<p>        8.   Now,  coming  to  the nature of the act committed by the accused\/<br \/>\nappellant, the Court has to necessarily reject the contention put forth by the<br \/>\nlearned counsel for the appellant.  In the instant case, it is true, from  the<br \/>\nevidence  available,  that there was a quarrel between the spouses, due to the<br \/>\ninsistence of the appellant to have a separate residence.   The  said  quarrel<br \/>\nhad taken  place in the evening hours on the previous day.  But the occurrence<br \/>\nhas taken place at 4.30 a.m.  on the next day  and  the  Court  is  unable  to<br \/>\nnotice  any  quarrel immediately preceding or any circumstance, which provoked<br \/>\nthe accused\/ appellant to commit such a heinous crime of cutting the  neck  of<br \/>\nhis wife.   In such circumstances, the Court is of the considered opinion that<br \/>\nthe act of the accused\/appellant cannot be brought under any of the exceptions<br \/>\nto Section 300 IPC., but would fall within the ambit of murder only and hence,<br \/>\nthe lower was perfectly right in finding the accused\/appellant guilty for  the<br \/>\noffence of  murder  and  awarded  life  imprisonment.  This Court is unable to<br \/>\nnotice any reason to interfere in the judgment of the Court below.\n<\/p>\n<p>        9.  In the result, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.  It  is<br \/>\nreported that  the  accused\/appellant  is on bail.  The learned Sessions Judge<br \/>\nshall take steps to commit  the  accused\/appellant  to  prison  to  serve  the<br \/>\nremaining period of sentence.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index:Yes<br \/>\nInternet:Yes<\/p>\n<p>bs\/<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.The Principal Sessions Judge, Salem.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The Inspector of Police, Idapadi Police Station, Salem.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Salem.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.The District Collector, Salem.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.The Director General of Police, Madras.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Ravi vs State Rep. By on 11 August, 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11\/08\/2005 CORAM THE HON&#8217;BLE MR JUSTICE N.DHINAKAR and THE HON&#8217;BLE MR JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM Crl.A. No. 206 of 2000 Ravi &#8230; Appellant -Vs- State rep. by Inspector of Police, Idapadi Police Station, Edapadi, Salem. &#8230; [&hellip;]<\/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-173718","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Ravi vs State Rep. By on 11 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ravi vs State Rep. By on 11 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2005-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-04-07T11:59:19+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ravi vs State Rep. By on 11 August, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-07T11:59:19+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005\"},\"wordCount\":2011,\"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\\\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005\",\"name\":\"Ravi vs State Rep. By on 11 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-07T11:59:19+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ravi vs State Rep. By on 11 August, 2005\"}]},{\"@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":"Ravi vs State Rep. By on 11 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ravi vs State Rep. By on 11 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-04-07T11:59:19+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ravi vs State Rep. By on 11 August, 2005","datePublished":"2005-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-07T11:59:19+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005"},"wordCount":2011,"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\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005","name":"Ravi vs State Rep. By on 11 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-07T11:59:19+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravi-vs-state-rep-by-on-11-august-2005#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ravi vs State Rep. By on 11 August, 2005"}]},{"@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\/173718","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=173718"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/173718\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=173718"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=173718"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=173718"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}