{"id":85516,"date":"2003-04-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-04-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003"},"modified":"2016-05-31T23:30:33","modified_gmt":"2016-05-31T18:00:33","slug":"s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003","title":{"rendered":"S.Jagadeesan vs The State on 9 April, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
S.Jagadeesan vs The State on 9 April, 2003<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED: 09\/04\/2003\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.DHINAKAR\nAND\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.ASHOK KUMAR\n\nCriminal Appeal No.329 of 2000\n\n\nS.Jagadeesan                                           .. Appellant\n\n-Vs-\n\nThe State, by Inspector of\nPolice, Palakodu Police Station,\nPalakodu, Dharmapuri District.\n(Crime No.3 of 1996).                           .. Respondent\n\n        Appeal against the judgment of the learned Principal  Sessions  Judge,\nDharmapuri at Krishnagiri, made in S.C.No.163 of 1998 dated 25.10.19 99.\n\n!For Appellant          :  Mr.V.Gopinath, S.C.\n                        For M\/s.L.Mahendran &\n                        C.Christopher\n\n^For Respondent         :  Mr.M.K.Subramanian\n                        Govt.  Advocate (Crl.  Side)\n\n\n:J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.DHINAKAR, J.)<\/p>\n
                The sole appellant, who, in this judgment, will be referred to
\nas  ‘the  accused,  was  tried  before  the  learned Principal Sessions Judge,
\nKrishnagiri, in Sessions Case No.163 of 1998.  The allegation against  him  in
\nthe charge  is  that  at  1.00  a.m.    on  30\/31.12.95,  he slapped his wife,
\nMuthumani and also beat her on the head and after she fell  down  unconscious,
\nthrew  her  into a canal, thinking that she is dead, as a result of which, she
\ndied on account of asphyxia due to drowning.    The  learned  Sessions  Judge,
\naccepting  the  oral  and documentary evidence, convicted and sentenced him to
\nimprisonment for life, which are in challenge in this appeal.\n<\/p>\n
                2.  The facts necessary  to  dispose  of  the  appeal  can  be
\nbriefly summarised as follows:-\n<\/p>\n
                The deceased  is  the  wife  of  the  accused.  P.W.2 is their
\ndaughter and P.W.1 is the younger brother  of  P.W.2.    During  the  relevant
\nperiod, they  were  residing  at  Pallimuthur.  The accused developed intimacy
\nwith his sister-in-law and the deceased was,  therefore,  questioning  him  as
\nregards the  said  conduct.  There used to be quarrels between the husband and
\nwife on account of that.  On 30.12.95 at about 8.00 a.  m., the  accused  left
\nthe  village,  after  informing  his family members that he intends purchasing
\nmanure.  But he did not return home until evening.  The deceased,  accompanied
\nby  her  son, P.W.1, went to the field to irrigate the lands and at 1.00 a.m.,
\nthe accused returned.  The deceased questioned the accused as to  why  he  had
\ntaken so  much  time for purchasing manure and found fault with him.  She also
\naccused him of having relationship with  her  sister,  leading  to  a  quarrel
\nbetween the  husband  and  wife.  The accused slapped her and also beat her on
\nthe head.  The deceased fell down and became  unconscious.    P.W.1,  who  was
\npresent, held  the hands of his father and requested him not to beat her.  The
\naccused took P.W.1 to the house and after leaving him in the  custody  of  his
\ndaughter,  P.W.2,  returned  to  the  field  and  finding  his  wife remaining
\nunconscious and thinking that she is dead, threw her into a canal.  Later,  he
\nreturned  home and on being questioned by his two children, informed them that
\ntheir mother has left for her parental home.   He,  thereafter,  went  to  his
\nfather-in-law’s house,  where  he  met  P.W.4  on  1.1.96.    The  accused was
\nquestioned by P.W.4 as he was in a pensive mood and the  accused,  thereafter,
\nopened his  heart  and  poured  out  the  truth.    P.W.4 took the accused and
\nproduced him before P.W.3, the Village Administrative Officer,  at  9.45  a.m.
\nand  to  the  Village  Administrative Officer, P.W.3, the accused narrated the
\nwhole incident.  The said narration  was  reduced  into  writing.    The  said
\nstatement of  the  accused  given  to  P.W.3  is  Ex.P.1.   P.W.3, thereafter,
\nprepared his report, Ex.P.2 and sent Exs.P.1, P.2 and the accused to  Palacode
\npolice  station,  where  they were produced before P.W.9, the Sub-Inspector at
\nnoon.  P.W.9, the Sub-Inspector, on receipt of Ex.P.1, registered  a  case  in
\nCrime No.3 of  1996  under  Section 302 I.P.C.  The accused was locked-up.  He
\nprepared express reports and Ex.P.7 is a copy of the printed first information
\nreport.  He informed the Inspector of Marandalli.\n<\/p>\n
                3.  P.W.10, on being informed about the  registration  of  the
\ncrime  over  V.H.F.,  reached  Palacode police station at 12.40 p.m., where he
\nobtained a copy of the printed first information report.  The accused  was  in
\nthe police  lock-up  and he was questioned.  The officer then proceeded to the
\nscene of occurrence and in the presence of  P.W.5  and  another,  prepared  an
\nobservation mahazar,  Ex.P.3.  The body was taken out of the canal and a rough
\nsketch, Ex.P.8, was prepared.  The photographer, P.W.6,  took  photographs  of
\nthe scene  of occurrence and the dead body.  The inquest was conducted between
\n3.00 a.m.  and 6.15 a.m.  in the  presence  of  panchayatdars,  during  which,
\nP.Ws.1,  2  and  others  were  questioned  and their statements were recorded.
\nEx.P.9 is the inquest report.  After the inquest, a requisition,  Ex.P.4,  was
\nissued  to the doctor for conducting autopsy and the body was handed over to a
\npolice constable, P.W.8.\n<\/p>\n
                4.  On receipt of Ex.P.4, the  requisition,  P.W.7,  the  then
\nCivil  Assistant  Surgeon attached to Government Hospital, Palacode, conducted
\nautopsy on the body of the deceased Muthumani and found the following external
\ninjuries:-\n<\/p>\n
1.  An abrasion over the back of right forearm in the middle 5 cm.  x 5 cm.\n<\/p>\n
2.  An abrasion over the front of lower jaw and neck 15 cm.  x 10 cm.\n<\/p>\n
3.  An abrasion over the right cheek 5 cm.  x 5 cm.\n<\/p>\n
4.  Multiple abrasion over the inner aspect of right and left thighs  each  10
\nand 5 cm.\n<\/p>\n
5.  An  abrasion  over the left temporal region behind the left ear 5 cm.  x 3
\ncm.\n<\/p>\n
6.  Bleeding from left ear.   All  the  above  said  injuries  are  antemortem
\ninnature.\n<\/p>\n
7.   Fish  bitten  marks  over  the left eye lids and left side mouth eaten by
\nfish.\n<\/p>\n
The skin of hands and feet are wrinkled.\n<\/p>\n
The doctor issued Ex.P.5, the post-mortem certificate, with the  opinion  that
\nthe  deceased died on account of asphyxia due to drowning and death would have
\noccurred about 50 to 60 hours prior to autopsy.\n<\/p>\n
                5.  P.W.10,  continuing  with  his  investigation,  questioned
\nwitnesses and  recorded  their  statements.   He sent the accused to Court for
\nremand.  He continued with his investigation, as the Inspector of Palacode was
\non leave.  The investigation in the case was, later, taken  up  by  P.W.11  on
\n3.12.96,  who  questioned  four  witnesses  and also the doctor, who conducted
\nautopsy and later, after his transfer, further investigation was taken  up  by
\nP.W.12, who laid the final report against the accused under Section 302 I.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
                6.  The  accused  was questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C.  on
\nthe incriminating circumstances appearing against him.    He  denied  all  the
\nincriminating circumstances.    He filed a written statement, in which, he has
\nstated that he had no  illicit  relationship  with  his  sister-inlaw  and  on
\n30.12.95,  he  took  his bed along with his children only to find out his wife
\nmissing in the morning of 31.12.95.  He has further alleged that  he  went  in
\nsearch  of  his  wife at his father-in-law’s house, where he was informed that
\nhis wife did not come there and  on  1.1  .96,  he  went  to  Palacode  police
\nstation,  where he gave a complaint about the missing of his wife and that the
\npolice officers detained him at the police station till 11.00 a.m.  and  later
\nthey sent  for  P.Ws.3 , 4 and others.  According to him, after the arrival of
\nP.Ws.3 and 4 and after a discussion, a statement was prepared, in which he was
\nforced to sign and that he did not give Ex.P.1 at the office  of  the  Village
\nAdministrative Officer, as claimed by the prosecution.\n<\/p>\n
                7.   The  prosecution examined P.W.7, the doctor, to establish
\nthe cause of death.  According to the doctor, he found the injuries, which  he
\nnoted  in  the post-mortem certificate, which we have already extracted in the
\nearlier part of the judgment.  According to him, the deceased died on  account
\nof asphyxia  due  to  drowning.    The  said  fact is also not disputed by the
\naccused.\n<\/p>\n
                8.  The question that is to be decided by us  is  whether  the
\naccused  intended  to  cause  the  death of the deceased and whether with that
\nintention, threw his wife into the canal, after beating her on the head and on
\nthe cheek, as sought to be proved by the prosecution through the eye  witness,
\nP.W.1.  P.W.1 is  the  son of the deceased.  He turned hostile.  The daughter,
\nP.W.2 also turned hostile.   The  only  evidence,  on  which  the  prosecution
\nperforce  had  to  rely,  is  the statement given by the accused to P.W.3, the
\nVillage Administrative Officer.  It is the evidence of P.W.3 that while he was
\nin his office on  1.11.96  at  9.45  a.m.,  the  accused  accompanied  by  his
\nbrother-in-law,  P.W.4,  met  him  and  thereafter,  the  accused narrated the
\nincident informing him that he has beaten his wife and thinking  that  she  is
\ndead, threw  her  into  the canal.  On going through the evidence of P.W.3, we
\nfind no infirmity in the evidence.  In fact, P.W.4, the brother-in-law of  the
\naccused, has supported P.W.3 and according to him, on 1.1.96, the accused came
\nto his  house  and  was  seen  in  a  pensive mood.  He questioned him and the
\naccused, thereafter, informed him that he has beaten his wife  and  threw  her
\ninto the  canal  and  according  to  him, he took the accused to P.W.3.  P.W.3
\nbeing an independent witness and having no  grudge  or  ill-will  against  the
\naccused, had no reason to come out with a false version.  The statement of the
\naccused  that  the  deceased  took her bed on 30.12.95 and was not seen in the
\nmorning on 31.12.95 could only be an after thought, in view of  the  statement
\nmade by  him  to  P.W.3, the Village Administrative Officer.  We do not attach
\nmuch importance to the defence theory that the deceased left the house on  her
\nown accord.   On going through the evidence of P.W.3 and Ex.P.1, the statement
\ngiven by the accused to P.W.3, we  find  no  infirmity  and  it  contains  the
\ndetails, which could have been only in the exclusive knowledge of the accused.
\nWe,  therefore, accept Ex.P.1 as a statement given by the accused to P.W.3 and
\nfind that the accused beat the deceased and thereafter,  threw  her  into  the
\ncanal, thinking that she is dead.\n<\/p>\n
                9.   The  final  question  that  is to be decided by us is the
\nnature of offence committed by the accused.    Admittedly,  the  case  of  the
\nprosecution  itself  is that the accused beat the deceased on the head and she
\nfell down.  A perusal of the statement, Ex.P.1, indicates  that  the  accused,
\nafter beating the deceased, took P.W.1 from the place and after leaving him at
\nthe house, returned to the scene of occurrence and found his wife lying on the
\nground.   According  to  him, he felt that his wife has died and therefore, in
\norder to escape the consequences of murder, he threw  the  dead  body  into  a
\ncanal.   This  shows that when he threw his wife into the canal, he was of the
\nimpression that his wife is dead on account of the beating given  by  him  and
\ndid not  know  that  she  was alive.  Therefore, the accused did not throw his
\nwife into the canal to cause her death by drowning, but threw  her  under  the
\nmistaken impression that she is dead and he is throwing the dead body into the
\ncanal.\n<\/p>\n
                10.  In  CHINNATHAMBI  Vs.    STATE  [1952 M.W.N.(Cr.) 227], a
\nDivision Bench of this Court had to decide the nature of the offence committed
\nby the appellant in that case and the facts in the case  before  the  Division
\nBench  are that the deceased was beaten by the accused with a stick and later,
\nthinking that the person, who was beaten, is dead, the body was  hanged  by  a
\nrope and  as a result of the said hanging, the said person died.  The Division
\nBench, on the above circumstances, came to the conclusion that the hanging had
\ntaken place in order to create a  false  evidence  under  the  impression  and
\nbelief that the woman, the deceased in that case, had already died as a result
\nof  the  blow which the appellant dealt on her, while in fact death has really
\nbeen caused by the hanging itself and therefore, it cannot be  said  that  the
\nappellant intended  to cause the death by hanging.  The Division Bench further
\nobserved that he was only hanging the body, which was dead already,  according
\nto his belief, in order to make it appear that the woman got herself hanged by
\nthe  rope and died as a result thereof and in such case, the offence committed
\nby the accused will only fall under Section 325 I.P.C., as  he  has  caused  a
\ngrievous injury.\n<\/p>\n
                11.  It could also be seen that the act itself does not make a
\nperson  guilty,  unless  his intentions are shown to be guilty, from the maxim
\n‘Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea’.  When we apply the above maxim,  we
\nare  of  the  view  that  the  facts  of the present case and the facts in the
\njudgment cited supra considered by the Division Bench are  similar  in  nature
\nand  that  the  said  judgment  will  apply with all force to the facts of the
\npresent case.  In the present case also, the accused had beaten the  deceased.
\nShe  fell  down  unconscious and thereafter, the accused, after returning from
\nhis house, where he left his son P.W.1, thinking that his wife is dead,  threw
\nher  into  the  canal and his wife, who was alive, died on account of asphyxia
\ndue to drowning.  At the time when the accused threw the body into the  canal,
\nhe  did  not  know  that  his  wife  is  only  unconscious and is not dead and
\ntherefore, when he was throwing the body of his wife into the  canal,  he  was
\nunder  the  mistaken  impression  that  the  death  has  already  occurred and
\ntherefore, the subsequent act of throwing the  body  into  the  canal  is  not
\ncommitted with  an  intention  to  cause  her death by drowning.  In the above
\ncircumstances, we are of the view that the  conviction  and  sentence  of  the
\naccused under Section 302 I.P.C.  are to be set aside and instead, he is to be
\nconvicted  under  Section 325 I.P.C., since the doctor, who conducted autopsy,
\nfound a fracture on the base of the skull.\n<\/p>\n
                11.  Accordingly, the conviction and sentence imposed  on  the
\nappellant under Section 302 I.P.C.  are set aside and instead, he is convicted
\nunder  Section  325  I.P.C.,  for  which  he  is sentenced to undergo rigorous
\nimprisonment for a period of three years.  The appeal is  dismissed  with  the
\nabove modification  in  conviction  and sentence.  The learned counsel for the
\nappellant submits that the appellant has already  undergone  the  sentence  of
\nthree  years  and if so, he shall be released forthwith, unless he is required
\nin connection with any other case.\n<\/p>\n
                                                        (N.D.,J.) (S.A.,J.)
\n                                                                09.04.2003
\nIndex:  Yes
\nWebsite:  Yes<\/p>\n
sra<\/p>\n
To<\/p>\n
1.The Principal Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri at Krishnagiri.\n<\/p>\n
2.The District Collector, Dharmapuri District.\n<\/p>\n
3.The Director General of Police, Chennai.\n<\/p>\n
4.The Superintendent, Central Prison, Salem.\n<\/p>\n
5.The Inspector of  Police,  Palakodu  Police  Station,  Palakodu,  Dharmapuri
\nDistrict.\n<\/p>\n
6.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court S.Jagadeesan vs The State on 9 April, 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09\/04\/2003 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.DHINAKAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.ASHOK KUMAR Criminal Appeal No.329 of 2000 S.Jagadeesan .. Appellant -Vs- The State, by Inspector of Police, Palakodu Police Station, Palakodu, Dharmapuri District. (Crime No.3 […]<\/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-85516","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nS.Jagadeesan vs The State on 9 April, 2003 - 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\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"S.Jagadeesan vs The State on 9 April, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003\" \/>\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=\"2003-04-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-31T18:00:33+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=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"S.Jagadeesan vs The State on 9 April, 2003\",\"datePublished\":\"2003-04-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-31T18:00:33+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003\"},\"wordCount\":2446,\"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\\\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003\",\"name\":\"S.Jagadeesan vs The State on 9 April, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2003-04-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-31T18:00:33+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"S.Jagadeesan vs The State on 9 April, 2003\"}]},{\"@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":"S.Jagadeesan vs The State on 9 April, 2003 - 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\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"S.Jagadeesan vs The State on 9 April, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2003-04-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-31T18:00:33+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":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"S.Jagadeesan vs The State on 9 April, 2003","datePublished":"2003-04-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-31T18:00:33+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003"},"wordCount":2446,"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\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003","name":"S.Jagadeesan vs The State on 9 April, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2003-04-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-31T18:00:33+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/s-jagadeesan-vs-the-state-on-9-april-2003#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"S.Jagadeesan vs The State on 9 April, 2003"}]},{"@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\/85516","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=85516"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/85516\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=85516"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=85516"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=85516"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}