{"id":84703,"date":"2008-02-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-02-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008"},"modified":"2015-04-03T12:23:22","modified_gmt":"2015-04-03T06:53:22","slug":"murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008","title":{"rendered":"Murugan vs Virudhunagar District on 5 February, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Murugan vs Virudhunagar District on 5 February, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED : 05\/02\/2008\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM\nAND\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.PALANIVELU\n\nCRL.A.(MD) No.46 of 2007\n\nMurugan\t\t\t\t\t.. Appellant\n\nvs\n\nState rep. by\nInspector of Police\nVathirairuppu Police Station\n(Crime No.214 of 2003)\nVirudhunagar District\t\t\t\t.. Respondent\n\n\n\n\tCriminal appeal preferred under Sec.374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure\nagainst the judgment of the Principal Sessions Judge, Srivilliputhur, made in\nS.C.NO.39 of 2004 dated 7.9.2004.\n\n!For Appellant\t\t...  Mr.A.P.Muthupandian\n\n^For Respondents\t...  Mr.P.N.Pandithurai\n\t\t\t   Additional Public Prosecutor\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.)<\/p>\n<p>\tThis appeal has arisen from the judgment of the Principal Sessions<br \/>\nDivision, Srivilliputhur at Virudhunagar, made in S.C.No.39 of 2004 whereby the<br \/>\nsole accused\/appellant stood charged and found guilty under Sec.302 of I.P.C.<br \/>\nand awarded life imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.1,000\/- and default<br \/>\nsentence.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2.The short facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal can be stated<br \/>\nas follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(a) P.Ws.1 to 3 were all residents of Ambedkar Street, V.Pudupatti<br \/>\nVillage.  The deceased Vanitha is the daughter of P.W.1 and the sister of P.Ws.2<br \/>\nand 3.  The appellant is the husband of the deceased.  On 18.10.2003 at about<br \/>\n11.00 A.M., when Vanitha was coming from a kanmai after taking bath, one Pandian<br \/>\nand others were teasing her, and immediately it was brought to the notice of her<br \/>\nhusband.  They proceeded to Watrap Police Station and gave a complaint to<br \/>\nP.W.11, the Sub Inspector of Police, on 19.10.2003 at about 12.15 P.M., on the<br \/>\nstrength of which a case came to be registered in Crime No.213 of 2004 under<br \/>\nSections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Eve teasing Act, and it was pending<br \/>\ninvestigation.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(b) While the matter stood thus, on 23.10.2003, at about 1.30 P.M., P.Ws.1<br \/>\nto 3 were standing outside the house and chatting.  At that time, they found<br \/>\nVanitha running and uttering &#8220;My husband is cutting me&#8221; and the accused chasing<br \/>\nher. Immediately, P.Ws.1 to 3 went nearby; but, Vanitha who was running, fell<br \/>\ndown. Immediately, the accused  indiscriminately cut her with an aruval on<br \/>\ndifferent parts of the body.  This was witnessed not only by P.Ws.1 to 3, but<br \/>\nalso by P.W.4.  Vanitha died instantaneously.  The accused fled away from the<br \/>\nplace of occurrence.  P.W.1 proceeded to the respondent police at about 6.00<br \/>\nP.M.  P.W.11, the Sub Inspector of Police, was on duty at that time.  P.W.1 gave<br \/>\na report, which is marked as Ex.P1, on the strength of which a case came to be<br \/>\nregistered in Crime No.214 of 2003 under Sec.302 of IPC.  The express F.I.R.,<br \/>\nEx.P9, was despatched to the Court.  P.W.12, the Inspector of Police, on receipt<br \/>\nof the copy of the FIR, took up investigation, proceeded to the spot, made an<br \/>\ninspection in the presence of witnesses and prepared an observation mahazar,<br \/>\nEx.P3, and a rough sketch, Ex.P10.  He recovered the material objects including<br \/>\nbloodstained earth and sample earth.  He conducted inquest on the dead body of<br \/>\nVanitha in the presence of witnesses and panchayatdars and prepared an inquest<br \/>\nreport, Ex.P11.  P.W.9 was the Photographer through whom the entire dead body<br \/>\nwas photographed.  M.O.4 series are the photos and negatives.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(c) Following the inquest, the dead body was subjected to postmortem by<br \/>\nP.W.8, the Senior Assistant Surgeon, attached to the Government Hospital,<br \/>\nWatrap.  After postmortem, he has given a certificate, Ex.P8, wherein he noted<br \/>\n10 external cut injuries, and he has also opined that she died out of shock and<br \/>\nhaemorrhage of the cut injury involving the major blood vessels of neck.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(d) The Investigator came to know that the accused surrendered before the<br \/>\nMagistrate&#8217;s Court.  Then, he filed an application for police custody, and the<br \/>\nsame was ordered.  The accused was taken to police custody and was interrogated.<br \/>\nHe gave a confessional statement voluntarily which was recorded in the presence<br \/>\nof witnesses.  The admissible part is marked as Ex.P5, pursuant to which he<br \/>\nproduced M.O.1, aruval, which was recovered under a cover of mahazar, Ex.P6.  He<br \/>\nwas again sent for judicial remand.  All the material objects recovered from the<br \/>\nplace of occurrence and from the dead body, and M.O.1, aruval, recovered on<br \/>\nproduction by the accused pursuant to the confession, were subjected to chemical<br \/>\nanalysis which resulted in two reports namely Ex.P13, the Chemical Analyst&#8217;s<br \/>\nreport, and Ex.P14, the Serologist&#8217;s report.  On completion of  investigation,<br \/>\nthe Investigator filed the final report.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3.The case was committed to Court of Sessions, and necessary charge was<br \/>\nframed.  The prosecution examined 12 witnesses and relied on 14 exhibits and 7<br \/>\nmaterial objects. On completion of evidence on the side of the prosecution, the<br \/>\naccused was questioned under Sec.313 of Cr.P.C. procedurally as to the<br \/>\nincriminating circumstances found in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses,<br \/>\nwhich he flatly denied as false. No defence witness was examined.  The Court<br \/>\nbelow heard the arguments advanced, took the view that the prosecution has<br \/>\nproved the case beyond reasonable doubt, found him guilty as per the charge of<br \/>\nmurder and awarded life imprisonment, which is the subject matter of challenge<br \/>\nbefore this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4.Advancing the arguments on behalf of the appellant, the learned Counsel<br \/>\nmade the following submissions:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(i) In the instant case, according to the prosecution, the occurrence has<br \/>\ntaken place at about 1.30 P.M.; but, the report was given only at 6.00 P.M., and<br \/>\nthus, there was a delay of 4 . hours noticed.  The FIR has also reached the<br \/>\nCourt only at 11.45 P.M., and thus, there also there is a delay.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(ii) It is highly doubtful whether Ex.P1 has come into existence as put<br \/>\nforth by the prosecution.  According to P.W.1, the police came to the spot<br \/>\nimmediately, and hence, Ex.P1, which, according to the prosecution, came into<br \/>\nexistence at 6.00 P.M., cannot be accepted.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(iii) Further, in the instant case, all these witnesses are closely<br \/>\nrelated to each other.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(iv) A sketch was prepared by the Investigator marked as Ex.P10, wherein<br \/>\nthe dead body is found away from the house of P.Ws.1 to 3, and assuming for a<br \/>\nmoment that they were actually standing in front of the house, they could not<br \/>\nhave seen the occurrence at all, and hence, the claim of the prosecution that<br \/>\nP.Ws.1 to 3 had witnessed the occurrence cannot be accepted.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(v) The medical opinion was also not in favour of the prosecution.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(vi) Apart from the above, it is highly a matter of surprise to note that<br \/>\nwhen he was taken to police custody, he gave a narration of the incident by way<br \/>\nof confession and also produced M.O.1 aruval. These things are unbelievable;<br \/>\nbut, the lower Court has not considered these aspects of the matter.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(vii) Even assuming that the prosecution has proved the case to the extent<br \/>\nthat it was the accused who attacked her with aruval and caused her death, the<br \/>\nact of the accused would not attract the penal provision of murder, since he<br \/>\nsuspected her fidelity, and just a few days prior to the occurrence, there was a<br \/>\nwordy quarrel.  Following the same, due to sustained provocation, he has acted<br \/>\nso, and under the circumstances, this legal aspect has got to be considered by<br \/>\nthe Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5.The Court heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the above<br \/>\ncontentions and paid its anxious consideration on the submissions made.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6.It is not a fact in controversy that one Vanitha the daughter of P.W.1<br \/>\nand the sister of P.Ws.2 and 3 was done to death in an incident that took place<br \/>\nat 1.30 P.M. on 23.10.2003.  The dead body of Vanitha following the inquest made<br \/>\nby the Investigator, was subjected to postmortem by P.W.8, the Doctor, who has<br \/>\nalso deposed before the Court.  From his evidence, it is quite clear that she<br \/>\ndied out of shock and haemorrhage due to the injuries sustained.  Apart from<br \/>\nthat, the postmortem certificate was also marked.  The fact that Vanitha died<br \/>\nout of homicidal violence was never questioned by the appellant\/accused at any<br \/>\nstage of the proceedings.  Hence, it can be factually recorded so.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7.In order to substantiate the case of the prosecution that it was the<br \/>\naccused who attacked her and caused her death, the prosecution examined 3<br \/>\nwitnesses namely P.Ws.1 to 3.  It is true that they are all closely related to<br \/>\nthe deceased.  But, on that ground, their evidence cannot be discarded.  Despite<br \/>\nthe exercise of the careful scrutiny test, their evidence stood the test.<br \/>\nP.Ws.1 to 3 have spoken in one voice that on the date of occurrence at about<br \/>\n1.30 P.M., when they were standing outside the house and chatting, the accused<br \/>\ncame with an aruval, and they heard the distressing cry of Vanitha who was just<br \/>\nrunning from her house, and she was being chased by the accused, and when<br \/>\nVanitha fell down, immediately, the accused gave different blows with the aruval<br \/>\nindiscriminately and caused instantaneous death. Despite the cross-examination,<br \/>\ntheir evidence remained unshaken.  All these witnesses have clearly spoken to<br \/>\nthe fact clinchingly, and hence, their evidence has got to be accepted.  That<br \/>\napart, their evidence stood fully corroborated by the medical evidence, and the<br \/>\nDoctor has clearly found that there were 10 cut injuries all over the body, and<br \/>\ndeath occurred due to shock and haemorrhage due to the injuries sustained.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8.Apart from the above, in the instant case, yet another circumstance was<br \/>\nthe recovery of the weapon of crime from the accused pursuant to his confession.<br \/>\nIn order to substantiate this fact, the prosecution has brought forth sufficient<br \/>\nevidence.  The trial Court has discussed the same and arrived at the conclusion<br \/>\nthat it was the accused who cut her with the aruval and caused instantaneous<br \/>\ndeath.  In view of the above, the contention put forth by the learned Counsel<br \/>\nfor the appellant that there are discrepancies in the evidence of the<br \/>\neyewitnesses cannot weigh much.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9.The other contention put forth by the learned Counsel for the appellant<br \/>\nthat Ex.P1 could not have come into existence cannot be accepted for the simple<br \/>\nreason that if the occurrence has taken place at 1.30 P.M., and if the police<br \/>\nhas already arrived and took the complaint, it would be advantageous to the<br \/>\nprosecution, and certainly it would not be disadvantageous.  The prosecution<br \/>\ncomes forward to state that it was reported to the police at about 6.00 P.M., as<br \/>\nspoken to by the author of Ex.P1, who is P.W.1, and also the Sub Inspector of<br \/>\nPolice who has recorded the same.  Hence, it leaves no doubt.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10.As far as P.Ws.1 to 3 are concerned, their evidence has got to be<br \/>\naccepted.  The contention that they have been standing before the house, and<br \/>\nhence, they could not have seen the occurrence cannot be accepted for the reason<br \/>\nthat when they found the deceased running with distressing cry, all the<br \/>\nwitnesses have seen the accused chasing her, and when she fell down, taking<br \/>\nadvantage of the same, he gave her blows with the aruval and caused her death<br \/>\ninstantaneously.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11.Further, the contention put forth by the learned Counsel for the<br \/>\nappellant that he suspected the fidelity, and there was some provocation due to<br \/>\nthe quarrel, and hence, he has cut her cannot be accepted for the simple reason<br \/>\nthat at the time of occurrence, there was nothing to provoke the accused, and<br \/>\neven at the time, when he came to the house, he was armed with aruval and cut<br \/>\nher, which was witnessed by the witnesses.  In such circumstances, the act of<br \/>\nthe accused cannot, but be one of murder.  Hence, the lower Court was perfectly<br \/>\ncorrect in recording a finding that it was a murder and awarded life<br \/>\nimprisonment, which does not call for interference.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12.In the result, this criminal appeal fails, and the same is dismissed<br \/>\nconfirming the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the lower Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>nsv\/<\/p>\n<p>To\n<\/p>\n<p>1.The Principal Sessions Judge<br \/>\n  Srivilliputhur\n<\/p>\n<p>2.Inspector of Police<br \/>\n  Vathirairuppu Police Station<br \/>\n  (Crime No.214 of 2003)<br \/>\n  Virudhunagar District\n<\/p>\n<p>3.The Additional Public Prosecutor<br \/>\n  Madurai<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Murugan vs Virudhunagar District on 5 February, 2008 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 05\/02\/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.PALANIVELU CRL.A.(MD) No.46 of 2007 Murugan .. Appellant vs State rep. by Inspector of Police Vathirairuppu Police Station (Crime No.214 of 2003) Virudhunagar District [&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-84703","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 v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Murugan vs Virudhunagar District on 5 February, 2008 - 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\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Murugan vs Virudhunagar District on 5 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-02-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-04-03T06:53:22+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\\\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Murugan vs Virudhunagar District on 5 February, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-02-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-03T06:53:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1943,\"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\\\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008\",\"name\":\"Murugan vs Virudhunagar District on 5 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-02-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-04-03T06:53:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Murugan vs Virudhunagar District on 5 February, 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":"Murugan vs Virudhunagar District on 5 February, 2008 - 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\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Murugan vs Virudhunagar District on 5 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-02-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-04-03T06:53:22+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\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Murugan vs Virudhunagar District on 5 February, 2008","datePublished":"2008-02-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-03T06:53:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008"},"wordCount":1943,"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\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008","name":"Murugan vs Virudhunagar District on 5 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-02-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-04-03T06:53:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/murugan-vs-virudhunagar-district-on-5-february-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Murugan vs Virudhunagar District on 5 February, 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\/84703","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=84703"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/84703\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=84703"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=84703"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=84703"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}