{"id":69804,"date":"2005-08-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-08-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005"},"modified":"2018-03-27T10:38:05","modified_gmt":"2018-03-27T05:08:05","slug":"amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005","title":{"rendered":"Amaravathi vs State Rep. By on 30 August, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
Amaravathi vs State Rep. By on 30 August, 2005<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED:30\/08\/2005\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.DHINAKAR\nAND\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM\n\nCRL. APPEAL NO. 839 OF 2000\nand\n472 OF 2001\n\nAmaravathi                             .. Appellant in CA No.839\/2000\n\nIdumban                                 .. Appellant in CA No.472\/2001\n\n-Vs-\n\nState rep. by\nInspector of Police\nKarimangalam Police Station\nDharmapuri District.                    .. Respondent in both the appeals<\/pre>\n
        Appeals preferred against the conviction and sentence  passed  by  the
\nlearned II  Addl.  Sessions Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dharmapuri at
\nKrishnagiri, made in S.C.  No.    201  of  1999  dated  10.08.2000  as  stated
\ntherein.\n<\/p>\n
For Appellant in       :  Mr.  V.Gopinath, SC, for\nC.A.  No.472\/01 M\/s.  K.Selvarangan for A-1\n\nFor Appellant in        :  Mr.  V.Gopinath, SC, for\nC.A.  No.839\/00 Mr.  C.C.S.  Pillai for A-2\n\nFor Respondent :  Mr.  V.Jayaprakash Narayanan\n                Govt.  Advocate (Crl.  Side)\n\n\n:COMMON JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
(JUDGMENT OF THE COURT WAS DELIVERED BY M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.)
\n        This judgment shall  govern the above two appeals.  C.A.  No.839\/00 is
\nby A-2 and C.A.  No.472\/01 is by A-1 in S.C.  No.201 of 1999 on  the  file  of
\nthe II  Addl.    Sessions  Judge-cum-Chief  Judicial Magistrate, Dharmapuri at
\nKrishnagiri.  The appellants were charged under Sections 30 2 and 201 IPC  and
\non  being  found  guilty,  they  were  sentenced  to imprisonment for life and
\ndirected to pay a fine of Rs.1,000\/= with a default sentence of  three  months
\nfor  the  former  offence  and  they  were  sentenced to three years rigourous
\nimprisonment and directed to pay a fine of Rs.1,000\/= with a default  sentence
\nof three  months  for  the  latter offence.  Hence, the present appeals by the
\nappellants challenging their conviction and sentence.\n<\/p>\n
        2.  The short facts necessary for the disposal of these appeals are as
\nfollows :-\n<\/p>\n
        P.W.1 is the son of the deceased  while  P.W.3  is  the  wife  of  the
\ndeceased.  They  were  residents  of  Solliyampalli village.  A-1 and A-2 also
\nbelong to the same village.  On 17.1.99, at about 4.00 p.m., A-1 came  to  the
\nhouse  of  the deceased and asked P.W.1 as to the whereabouts of his father in
\norder to take him along with him for having mutton food.  P.W.1  informed  A-1
\nthat  the  deceased  was in the house of Madheswaran so as to enable A-1 to go
\nand take the deceased for taking food.  Accordingly, A-1  went  and  took  the
\ndeceased outside for  taking food.  Till about 8.30 p.m.  the deceased did not
\nreturn.  Therefore, P.W.3, the wife of the deceased gave  P.W.1  a  torch  and
\nasked him to go in search of his father.  P.W.1 took the torch, M.O.1 and went
\nin search  of  his  father.    When  he  was  just  crossing the cane field of
\nRanganathan Chettiar, he heard the distressing cries of his father.   When  he
\nreached  there,  he found A-1 attacking his father with a spade, while A-2 was
\nstabbing him on his chest and other parts of the body.  P.W.1, on seeing this,
\nshouted for help.  A-1 threatened him with  dire  consequences.    Immediately
\nP.W.1 ran  away from the place.  Thereafter, A-1 and A-2 took the dead body of
\nthe deceased and dropped it inside the well situate on  the  backside  of  the
\nhouse of P.W.1.\n<\/p>\n
        3.   P.W.1,  from  the  scene of occurrence, proceeded to Sengodapatti
\nvillage to inform about the occurrence to his uncle, P.W.6.   He  reached  the
\nplace  at  about  twelve  midnight and informed about the occurrence to P.W.6.
\nBoth P.W.s 1 and 6 returned to the village and they saw the dead  body  inside
\nthe well  situate  at  the backside of the house of P.W.1.  They took the dead
\nbody out of the well.  P.W.3 also came out and the villagers gathered.\n<\/p>\n
        4.  On 18.1.99 at about 6.00 a.m., P.W.2, the  Village  Administrative
\nOfficer came  to  know about the occurrence.  A report was given to him, which
\nstands marked as Ex.P-1 and along with the report, Ex.P-1, P.W.2, the  Village
\nAdministrative  Officer proceeded to Karimangalam police station where P.W.17,
\nthe Sub-Inspector of Police was on duty to whom Ex.P-1 and Ex.P-3, the  report
\nof the  Village  Administrative Officer, were handed over.  On the strength of
\nthe same, P.W.17 registered a case in  crime  No.70\/99.    The  printed  first
\ninformation report, Ex.P-24 was despatched to court.\n<\/p>\n
        5.   On  receipt of a copy of the printed first information report, P.
\nW.19, the Inspector of Police, took up investigation.   He  proceeded  to  the
\nscene  of  occurrence, made an inspection in the presence of two witnesses and
\nprepared an observation mahazar, Ex.P-2 and  drew  a  rough  sketch,  Ex.P-25.
\nM.O.s  5  and  6,  bloodstained  earth and sample earth were recovered under a
\nmahazar.  The dead body was caused to  be  photographed  through  P.W.16,  the
\nphotographer and the photographs are marked as M.O.14 series.  Thereafter, the
\ninvestigating  officer conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased in
\nthe presence of witnesses and  panchayatadars  and  prepared  inquest  report,
\nEx.P-25.   After  the  inquest,  the  dead  body  was  handed over to a police
\nconstable with a requisition to the doctor for conducting autopsy.\n<\/p>\n
        6.  On receipt of the requisition,  P.W.14,  Civil  Assistant  Surgeon
\nattached  to  the  Government  Headquarters  Hospital,  Dharmapuri,  conducted
\nautopsy on the dead body of the deceased and found the following injuries :-
\n“1) A laceration back of scalp 12 cm x 3 cm x bone deep underlying bone  found
\nfractured.\n<\/p>\n
2) Cut injury below right cheek 5 cm x 1 cm x = cm bone deep.\n<\/p>\n
3) Cut  injury  left  side  cheek 3 cm x 1 cm x = cm.  Underlying mandible was
\nfound fractured.\n<\/p>\n
4) Diffuse contusion front of neck.\n<\/p>\n
5) Bleeding right ear and bleeding from mouth present.”
\nThe doctor issued Ex.P-21,  the  post-mortem  certificate,  opining  that  the
\ndeceased  would  appear  to  have  died of head injury 36 to 48 hours prior to
\nautopsy.\n<\/p>\n
        7.  In the meantime, A-1 and A-2 were caught by the villagers and they
\nwere produced at the police station at about twelve noon on 18.1.99  .    They
\nwere arrested.    A-1  gave a voluntary confessional statement, the admissible
\nportion of which is marked as Ex.P-18, pursuant to which  A-1  produced  M.O.6
\nand A-2  produced M.O.7 and they were seized under a mahazar, Ex.P-7.  All the
\nmaterial objects recovered from the scene of occurrence, from the dead body of
\nthe deceased and from the accused were sent to court along with a  requisition
\nto send them for analysis.  Accordingly the material objects were subjected to
\nanalysis,  which  resulted in the receipt of Ex.P-17, chemical analysis report
\nand Ex.P-18, serology report.   On  the  completion  of  investigation,  final
\nreport was  filed  against  the  appellants by the investigating officer.  The
\ncase was committed to the court of sessions, necessary charges were framed  by
\nthe sessions court and the case was taken up for trial.\n<\/p>\n
        8.  In order to substantiate the charges levelled against the accused,
\nthe  prosecution  marched  nineteen witnesses and relied on twentysix exhibits
\nand fourteen material objects.  On the completion of the evidence on the  side
\nof the  prosecution, the accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C.  as
\nto the incriminating circumstances found in the evidence  of  the  prosecution
\nwitnesses.  They denied  them as false.  No defence witness was examined.  The
\ntrial court heard the arguments advanced by either side and after  a  thorough
\nscrutiny of the materials available before it, found the accused guilty as per
\nthe charges and awarded the punishment as referred to above.  Hence, these two
\nappeals.\n<\/p>\n
        9.    The  learned  senior  counsel  leading  the  arguments  for  the
\nappellants inter alia made the following submissions.  In  the  instant  case,
\nthe only  eye  witness, according to the prosecution, was P.W.1.  It is highly
\ndoubtful whether P.W.1 would have been present at the time  of  occurrence  at
\nall.   According  to  the  prosecution, the occurrence has taken place at 9.00
\np.m.  and it was also witne ssed by P.W.1.  But P.   W.1,  though  claimed  to
\nhave  witnessed  the occurrence, has not gone back to inform his mother at his
\nhouse which is situate nearby or inform any of the villagers calling for their
\nhelp, but he has proceeded  to  the  place  of  his  uncle,  P.W.6,  which  is
\nadmittedly situate  eighteen kilometres away from the place of occurrence.  It
\nis pertinent to point out that on the  way  the  Palakode  police  station  is
\nsituate.   Neither  on the way to Sengodapatti to the house of P.W.6 nor after
\nseeing him on return from the place to his village along with P.W.6, P.W.1 had
\ninformed the police authorities about the occurrence and lodged  a  complaint.
\nIt  is  pertinent to point out that P.W.6 even after the information about the
\ncrime has not started from the place immediately, but has retained  P.W.1  for
\nan  hour  and  only,  thereafter, they have started from the place and both of
\nthem after coming to the house of P.W.1 found the dead body.  Nowhere in their
\nevidence it is stated as to how the witnesses came to know that the dead  body
\nwas inside  the  well  situate at the back of the house of P.W.1.  The further
\ncase of the prosecution, which is highly improbable,  was  that  A-1  and  A-2
\nafter  attacking  and  causing  the  death  of  the  deceased  at the place of
\noccurrence have taken the risk of  carrying  the  dead  body  for  nearly  two
\nfurlongs  along  the field and dropped the body inside the well situate in the
\nback of the house of P.W.1.  This casts a doubt as to whether  the  occurrence
\ncould  have taken place as putforth by the prosecution and whether P.W.1 could
\nhave seen the occurrence at all.  In the instant case, even after reaching the
\nhouse, neither P.W.1 nor P.W.6 inform P.W.3 the wife of the deceased, who  was
\nsleeping inside  the  house.    According to P.W.3, after hearing the cries at
\nabout 5.00 a.m., she came out of the house and saw the dead body.   All  these
\nfacts  would go to show that P.W.1 could not have seen the occurrence and that
\nP.W.1 after seeing the dead body has given a report as  if  he  has  seen  the
\noccurrence implicating  both  the  accused  in  the  crime.  Added further the
\nlearned senior counsel,  the  overt  acts  attributed  to  A-2  is  thoroughly
\nartificial,  in that, A-1 attacked the deceased and the deceased fell down and
\nthat A-2 sat on the chest of the deceased and stabbed  him.    All  the  above
\nfacts  would  go  to  show that the evidence of P.W.1 should have been brushed
\naside as one unbelievable and unacceptable.   In  the  circumstances,  in  the
\nabsence of any acceptable legal evidence other than the evidence of P.W.1, the
\nprosecution had  no case at all.  Apart from that, the alleged recovery of the
\nweapons based on the confessional  statement  was  nothing  but  a  subsequent
\nintroduction  in order to strengthen the prosecution case, if possible, but in
\nvain.  In the circumstances, the trial court should have acquitted the accused
\noutright, but has found them guilty erroneously, which has got to be set right
\nby this Court.\n<\/p>\n
        10.  This Court heard the learned Addl.  Public  Prosecutor  appearing
\nfor the State on the above contentions and also perused the recorded evidence,
\nboth oral and documentary.\n<\/p>\n
        11.   It  is  no  doubt  true  that  the  prosecution has succeeded in
\nestablishing the cause of death of the deceased,  Sevethan,  by  examining  P.
\nW.14,  the  doctor,  who  conducted  autopsy  and the post-mortem certificate,
\nEx.P-21 issued by him.  The doctor has opined that death  was  on  account  of
\nhead injury.    The  evidence  of  the  doctor and the postmortem certificate,
\nEx.P-21 issued by him, conclusively establish  that  the  deceased,  Sevethan,
\ndied on  account of homicidal violence.  The said fact was not disputed by the
\nappellants before the trial court nor it is disputed before this  Court.    On
\nthe  medical  evidence  we hold that the deceased died on account of homicidal
\nviolence.\n<\/p>\n
        12.  In the instant case, the prosecution came with  specific  charges
\nagainst  the  appellants that both of them attacked the deceased at about 9.00
\np.m.  on the night of 17.1.99 and after putting an end  to  the  life  of  the
\ndeceased,  the  appellants took the dead body from the scene of occurrence and
\ndropped the same into the well, which is situate on the backside of the  house
\nof P.W.1.    In  the  instant  case,  P.W.1  was  the  only eye witness to the
\noccurrence.  It is settled principle of law that even if the  prosecution  has
\ngot  only  one  eye  witness and if the witness is believable, the Court could
\nrender a judgment of conviction.  But in the instant case, P.W.1 was  the  son
\nof  the  deceased  and,  hence,  his  evidence  has  got to be looked into and
\nscrutinised with great care and caution.  If that test  is  exercised  on  his
\nevidence,  this  Court has no option other than to reject his testimony as one
\nfalse.\n<\/p>\n
        13.  According to the prosecution, the occurrence has taken  place  at
\nabout 9.00 p.m.  when P.W.1 went in search of his father with the torch, M.O.1
\nand  that  when he was just crossing the cane field of Ranganatha Chettiar, he
\nheard the distressing cries of his father and when he  looked  that  side,  he
\nfound  A-1  and  A-2  attacking  his father with a spade and knife and when he
\nshouted he was threatened and that he ran away from the place.   Had  it  been
\ntrue,  the natural conduct of any prudent person in the circumstances would be
\nto go to his  house  immediately  and  inform  his  mother  and  to  call  the
\nneighbours and villagers  for  help.    But  P.W.1 did not do so.  Instead, he
\nproceeded all the way to  Sengodapatti  village,  which  is  situate  eighteen
\nkilometres  away,  in  the  dark  hours  in  order to inform his uncle, P.W.6.
\nAccording to the evidence of P.W.6, even after P.W.1 informed him, he did  not
\nimmediately  proceed  from  his  house, but he retained P.W.1 for an hour and,
\nthereafter both of them started.  It is an admitted fact that from  the  place
\nof occurrence when P.W.1 proceeded to Sengodapatti, Palakode police station is
\nsituate on  the  way.  It is pertinent to point out that neither on the way to
\nSengodapatti to the house of P.W.6 nor after seeing him and on return from the
\nplace to  his  village  along  with  P.W.6,  P.W.1  had  informed  the  police
\nauthorities  about  the  occurrence  and lodged a complaint, but both of them,
\nnamely, P.W.s 1 and 6 went directly to the house of P.W.1 and found  the  body
\nin the  well  situate  on  the  backside of the house of P.W.1.  It is not the
\nevidence of P.W.1 that he saw both the accused  carrying  the  dead  body  and
\ndropping it inside the well.\n<\/p>\n
        14.   At  this  juncture  it  has  to be pointed out that it is highly
\nartificial on the side  of  the  prosecution  to  putforth  a  case  that  the
\nappellants,  after committing the murder, took the dead body from the scene of
\noccurrence to the well, which is situate at  the  backside  of  the  house  of
\nP.W.1, which  is  about  two furlongs away.  It is to be pointed out that both
\nthe appellants would have entertained a risk of taking the body, which  nobody
\nwould  take and, therefore, it is highly doubtful whether the occurrence would
\nhave taken place as putforth by the prosecution.\n<\/p>\n
        15.  Now apart from the above, the further conduct of  P.W.1  that  he
\ndid  not  inform  his  mother even after returning to the house bringing along
\nwith him P.W.6 is too tall a claim  to  be  believed  and  the  same  is  also
\nfalsified by  the  evidence  of P.W.3 herself.  According to P.W.3, who is the
\nwife of the deceased, after sending her son P.W.1 during night hours in search
\nof the deceased, she went to bed and she woke up only at 5.30 a.m.  on hearing
\nthe alarm and she opened the house and she found P.W.s 1 and 6 in the backside
\nof the house and the body  of  the  deceased  was  also  lying  there.    This
\ntherefore  shows  that P.W.3 came to know about the occurrence only about 5.30
\na.m., nearly eight and half hours later to the occurrence.   The  evidence  of
\nP.W.3  falsifies the evidence of P.W.1 and casts a doubt on the evidence of P.
\nW.1 as to whether he could have witnessed the occurrence.\n<\/p>\n
        16.  The facts, which we have narrated above, would go to show that in
\nthe instant case the evidence of P.W.1 remains uncorroborated and,  therefore,
\nit  would  be  highly  unsafe  to accept such an interested and uncorroborated
\ntestimony and find the appellants guilty, which the trial court has failed  to
\nappreciate and, therefore, the appellants are entitled for acquittal.\n<\/p>\n
        17.  In result, the conviction and sentence awarded by the trial court
\nare  set  aside  and  the  appellants  are acquitted of all the charges framed
\nagainst them.  The criminal appeals are allowed.   It  is  reported  that  the
\nappellants are on bail.  Bail bonds executed by them shall stand cancelled.\n<\/p>\n
Index :  Yes
\nInternet :  Yes
\nGLN<\/p>\n
TO<\/p>\n
1) The II Addl.  Sessions Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate
\nDharmapuri at Krishnagiri.\n<\/p>\n
2) -Do- Thro’ The Principal Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri.\n<\/p>\n
3) The District Collector, Dharmapuri.\n<\/p>\n
4) The Director General of Police, Chennai.\n<\/p>\n
5) The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.\n<\/p>\n
6) The Superintendent of Central Prison, Salem.\n<\/p>\n
7) The Inspector of Police, Karimangalam Police Station, Dharmapuri Dt.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court Amaravathi vs State Rep. By on 30 August, 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:30\/08\/2005 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.DHINAKAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM CRL. APPEAL NO. 839 OF 2000 and 472 OF 2001 Amaravathi .. Appellant in CA No.839\/2000 Idumban .. Appellant in CA No.472\/2001 […]<\/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-69804","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAmaravathi vs State Rep. By on 30 August, 2005 - 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\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Amaravathi vs State Rep. By on 30 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005\" \/>\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=\"2005-08-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-03-27T05:08:05+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\\\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Amaravathi vs State Rep. By on 30 August, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-08-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-27T05:08:05+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005\"},\"wordCount\":2809,\"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\\\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005\",\"name\":\"Amaravathi vs State Rep. By on 30 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-08-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-27T05:08:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Amaravathi vs State Rep. By on 30 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":"Amaravathi vs State Rep. By on 30 August, 2005 - 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\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Amaravathi vs State Rep. By on 30 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-08-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-03-27T05:08:05+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\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Amaravathi vs State Rep. By on 30 August, 2005","datePublished":"2005-08-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-27T05:08:05+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005"},"wordCount":2809,"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\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005","name":"Amaravathi vs State Rep. By on 30 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-08-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-27T05:08:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amaravathi-vs-state-rep-by-on-30-august-2005#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Amaravathi vs State Rep. By on 30 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\/69804","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=69804"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69804\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69804"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69804"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69804"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}