{"id":85860,"date":"2010-01-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010"},"modified":"2014-10-16T13:44:57","modified_gmt":"2014-10-16T08:14:57","slug":"k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010","title":{"rendered":"K.Karthik vs State By The Inspector Of Police on 29 January, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
K.Karthik vs State By The Inspector Of Police on 29 January, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 29\/01\/2010\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.MURGESEN\nand\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO\n\nCRL.A.No.1106 OF 2002\n\n1.K.Karthik\n2.S.Ganesan\t            ... Appellants\/A1 and A2\n\nVs\n\nState by the Inspector of Police,\nKumbakonam East Police Station.\nCrime No.301 of 2000        ... Respondent\/Complainant\n\n\tCriminal Appeal filed under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C against the judgment of\nconviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions\nJudge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tanjavur at Kumbakonam, dated 24.06.2002,\nmade in S.C.No.128 of 2001.\n\n!For Appellants... Mr.R.Shanmugasundaram\n\t           Senior Counsel for Mr.T.Sekar\n^For Respondent... Mr.Issac Manuel\n                   Additional Public Prosecutor\n\t     \t\t\t *****\n\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
(Judgment of the Court was passed by P.MURGESEN, J)<\/p>\n
\tThis Criminal Appeal is directed against the conviction and sentence
\nimposed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge cum Chief Judicial
\nMagistrate, Tanjavur at Kumbakonam, dated 24.06.2002, made in S.C.No.128 of 2001
\non the appellants\/A1 and A2.\n<\/p>\n
\t2.The case of the prosecution is as under:-\n<\/p>\n
\tP.W.1-Chakkarapani is the father of deceased Sempu Ravi.  P.W.2-Mani @
\nManikandan is the brother of Sempu Ravi.  P.W.3-Balan @ Nondi Balan is the
\nresident of the same street in which the victim Sempu Ravi was residing. On
\n28.08.2000 at 7.30 P.M., there was a quarrel between the 1st accused Karthick
\nand the deceased Sempu Ravi and they attacked each other.  On 29.08.2000 at 1.15
\nA.M., P.W.14-Kabilan, Head Constable of Kumbakonam East Police Station received
\na statement from the first accused Karthick and registered a case against the
\ndeceased Sempu Ravi in crime No.293 of 2000 under Section 324 I.P.C.  Ex.P.20 is
\nthe Xerox Copy of the F.I.R. registered in Crime No.293 of 2000.  Then on the
\nsame day at 2″ A.M., he received a statement from the deceased Sempu Ravi and
\nregistered a case against the first accused Karthick in Crime No.294 of 2000
\nunder Sections 341 and 324 I.P.C. Ex.P.21 is the Xerox copy of the F.I.R.
\nregistered in Crime No.294 of 2000. After taking treatment for four days,
\ndeceased Sempu Ravi returned to his house from the hospital.\n<\/p>\n
\t3.On 02.09.2000 at 10.00 P.M., when the deceased Sempu Ravi was talking
\nwith Sekar and P.W.3-Balan @ Nondi Balan in the middle of the Kumbakonan
\nChakkarapani Koil Thermutti Street, both the accused came there and attacked the
\ndeceased with knives.  On seeing this, P.W.1, the father of the deceased Sempu
\nRavi attacked the first accused with wooden log and the first accused sustained
\ninjury.  Then the accused also attacked P.W.1 with knives.  Then P.W.1 and the
\nvictim were taken to hospital. They were treated by P.W.6-Dr.Shivakumar. He
\nexamined P.W.1 and issued Ex.P.6-A.R. Copy and he found the following injuries:
\n\t“1.Cut injury over Left Shoulder 5 x 3 x 2cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t2.Cut injury Left wrist 10 x 5 x 3cm.”\n<\/p>\n
M.O.9-X-Ray was taken by P.W.7-Dr.Chandrasekaran and he opined that the second
\ninjury sustained by P.W.1 is a grievous injury.\n<\/p>\n
\t4.On the same day P.W.6 examined the victim Sempu Ravi and issued Ex.P.7-
\nA.R. Copy. He found the following injuries:\n<\/p>\n
\t“1.Cut injury over Right side face 15 x 5 x 5cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t2.Cut injury over Right side Neck 10 x 5 x 3cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t3.Cut injury over Right Shoulder joint 6 x 3 x 3cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t4.Cut injury Right Chest 3 x 3 x 2cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t4.Cut injury Right Chest near nipple 3 x 2 x 2cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t5.Cut injury centre front neck 15 x 5 x 3cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t6.Cut injury over centre Abdomen 5 x 3 x 3cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t7.Abrasion over Right Knee 8 x 2 x 1cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t8.Abrasion over Left Knee 5 x 3 x 1cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t9.A stab injury on Right back of chest 3 x 3 x 2cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t10.Sutured wound over Left Inguinal region.”\n<\/p>\n
\t5.P.W.10-R.Manoharan was the Head Constable of Kumbakonam East Police
\nStation.  On 03.09.2000 at 3.00 A.M., he received Ex.P.10-Intimation that P.W.1-
\nChakkarapani was admitted in the Government Hospital for sustaining injury in a
\nquarrel and Ex.P.11-Intimation that deceased Sempu Ravi was brought dead to the
\nhospital.  He gave both the intimations to the Sub Inspector of Police.\n<\/p>\n
\t6.P.W.11-Palanivelu, Sub Inspector of Police of Kumbakonam East Police
\nStation, on 03.09.2000 at 3.00 A.M., received the intimations from P.W.10 and
\nwent to the hospital and examined P.W.1 and recorded his statement as Ex.P.1 and
\nregistered a case in Crime No.301 of 2000 under Sections 324 and 302 I.P.C.
\nEx.P.12 is the printed F.I.R.  He also received a complaint from the first
\naccused and registered a case in Crime No.302 of 2000 under Sections 341 and 324
\nI.P.C.  Ex.P.13 is the printed F.I.R. He sent both the F.I.Rs. to the Court.
\nEx.P.9 is the passport given to P.W.9-Thandayutham to hand over the F.I.R. to
\nthe Court.\n<\/p>\n
\t7.Then P.W.15-Seenivasan took up the case for investigation and on
\n03.09.2000 at 6.00 A.M., he visited the scene of occurrence and prepared Ex.P.2-
\nObservation Mahazar and Ex.P.22-Rough Sketch in the presence of P.W.4-
\nBalakrishnan, Village Administrative Officer and Batcha.  Then he recovered
\nM.O.6 series – Chappals (Sport King), M.O.7-Blood Stained Karungal Thar and
\nM.O.8-Ordinary Karungal Thar in the presence of the said witnesses under Ex.P.3-
\nMahazar.  Then he went to the Kumbakonam Government Hospital at 8.00 A.M. and
\nconducted inquest over the body of the deceased in the presence of Panchayars
\nand prepared Ex.P.24-Inquest Report. Then he recovered M.O.1-4 feet dhoti (Brown
\nColour and Red colour border) and M.O.2-White Colour Aeroslak Shirt with GMK
\nKumbakonam Label from P.W.1 and M.O.3-T.C. White Colour Full Hand Shirt from the
\nbody of the deceased under Ex.P.23-Form 95. Then he sent the body of the
\ndeceased for conducting postmortem through P.W.13-Muthusamy, Police Constable.\n<\/p>\n
\t8.Postmortem was conducted on the body of the deceased by P.W.8-
\nDr.Damodaran. He examined the body of the deceased and he gave Ex.P.8-postmortem
\ncertificate. On examination he found the following the following injuries:
\n“External Injuries: 1) An incised wound, behind the Right ear 7 x 2 x 1cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t2) An incised wound just below the angle of Right mandible 3 x 0.5 x 1cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t3) An incised wound over the Right side of the chin 5 x 2 x 2cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t4) An incised wound over the Suprasternal notch 3 x 0.5 x 0.5cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t5) An incised wound over the Right shoulder 2.5 x 0.5 x 0.5cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t6) An incised wound 2cm above the Right nipple 0.5 x 0.5 x 0.5cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t7) An incised wound 2cm above and medial to Right nipple 0.5 x 0.5 x
\n0.5cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t8) A stab wound over the epigastrium 1cm x 1cm x 6cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t9) An abrasion (Graze) just below the Right knee joint 4cm x 2cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t10) An abrasion (Graze) just below the Left Knee joint 2cm x 2cm.\n<\/p>\n
\t11) An incised wound 1 x 0.5 x 1cm seen 7cm medial to the upper border of
\nthe Left scapula.\n<\/p>\n
\t12) A stab wound 2cm x 0.5cm x 5cm seen 3cm medial to the middle of the
\nmedial border of Right Scapula.\n<\/p>\n
\t13) A stab wound 2cm x 0.5cm x 5cm seen just below the injurior border of
\nthe Right scapula.\n<\/p>\n
\t14) An incised wound 2 x  0.5 x 1cm seen 3cm below the origin of the Left
\n12th lib.\n<\/p>\n
\t15. A sutured wound (3 Sutures) seen over the Left inguinal region.”\n<\/p>\n
\t9.After postmortem, P.W.13 recovered M.O.10-4 feet dhoti (Red colour
\nborder) and M.O.11-Jatti from the body of the deceased and handed over the same
\nto the investigating officer through Ex.P.19-Special Report.\n<\/p>\n
\t10.On 06.09.2000 at 9.00 A.M., P.W.15 arrested A2-Ganesan and recorded his
\nvoluntary confession statement in the presence of P.W.5-Ganesan and Murugan. The
\nadmissible portion of the confession statement of A2 is Ex.P.4. On the basis of
\nthe confession statement, he recovered M.O.4-Knife (Yellow Colour Handle) and
\nM.O.5-Knife (Brass Handle) under Ex.P.5-Mahazar.  On the same day at 13.30
\nhours, he arrested A1-Karthick in front of the hospital. Then he handed over the
\naccused to judicial custody and the material objects to the Court.\n<\/p>\n
\t11.On 29.09.2000, P.W.15 sent Ex.P.14-Requisition letter to the Court for
\nsending the material objects for conducting chemical examination. Based on that
\nJudicial Magistrate sent a requisition letter to the Forensic Laboratory.
\nEx.P.15 is the office copy of the requisition letter. P.W.12-Ramanathan is the
\nHead Clerk of the Judicial Magistrate Court. Ex.P.16 is the Biologist Report,
\nEx.P.17 is the Chemical Analyst Report and Ex.P.18 is the Serological Report
\nreceived by the Court.\n<\/p>\n
\t12.After enquiring the witnesses and after completing the investigation,
\non 26.12.2000, P.W.15 filed charge sheet against the accused under Sections 302
\nand 307 of I.P.C. He also enquired into Crime No.302 of 2000 under Section 341
\nand 324 I.P.C. registered on the basis of the complaint given by the first
\naccused and found the same as false and sent Ex.P.25-referred charge sheet to
\nthe Court after sending referral notice to the first accused.\n<\/p>\n
\t13.Before the trial Court, P.Ws.1 to 15 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.25
\nand M.Os.1 to 11 were marked. All the incriminating pieces of evidence let in by
\nthe prosecution witnesses were put to the accused under Section 313(1) of the
\nCode of Criminal Procedure questioning the accused, and the accused denied the
\nsame as false. On the side of the accused Ex.D.1 was marked. There was no oral
\nevidence adduced on the side of the accused.\n<\/p>\n
\t14.On consideration of the evidence on record, the learned Additional
\nDistrict and Sessions Judge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thanjavur at
\nKumbakonam found the appellants\/A1 and A2 guilty under Sections 302 r\/w 34 and
\n326 I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a
\nfine of Rs.5,000\/- each in default to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period
\nof one year each for the offence under Section 302 r\/w 34 and sentenced each of
\nthem to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years and to pay a fine
\nof Rs.5,000\/- each in default to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for a period of
\nsix months each for the offence under Section 326 I.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
\t15.Challenging the judgment of the learned  Additional District and
\nSessions Judge cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tanjavur at Kumbakonam, the
\npresent Criminal Appeal has been filed by the appellants\/A1 and A2.\n<\/p>\n
\t16.Now the question that needs to be answered in this appeal is whether
\nthe appellants\/A1 and A2 could be held guilty under Sections 302 r\/w 34 and 326
\nI.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
\t17.P.W.1-Chakkarapani is the father of the deceased Sempu Ravi.  P.W.2-
\nMani @ Manikandan is the brother of the deceased Sempu Ravi.  P.W.3-Balan @
\nNondi Balan is the resident in the same street in which the deceased was living.
\nThe relationship between the parties are not cordial.  On 28.08.2000 at 7.30
\nP.M., there was a quarrel between the victim Sempu Ravi and the first accused
\nKarthick. So, both the parties have lodged a complaint as against each other.
\nEx.P.20 would show that a complaint was given by the first accused against the
\ndeceased Sempu Ravi, which was registered in Crime No.293 of 2000 under Section
\n324 I.P.C. Ex.P.21 would show that a complaint was given by the deceased Sempu
\nRavi against the first accused, which was registered in Crime No.294 of 2000
\nunder Sections 341 and 324 I.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
\t18.On the fateful day i.e., on 02.09.2000 at 10.00 P.M., when the deceased
\nwas talking with P.W.3 and Ravi near his house, the occurrence took place.  At
\nthe time there was light, which was spoken by P.W.1. Further, the presence of
\nlight is not disputed.  According to the prosecution, the accused attacked the
\ndeceased with knives and P.W.1, the father of the victim intervened and attacked
\nthe first accused with wooden log and the first accused also sustained injuries.\n<\/p>\n
\t19.Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that
\nthe complainant parties are the aggressors and only in retaliation the accused
\nattacked the victim.  The stand of the defence cannot be true because a
\ncomplaint was given by the first accused and the same was registered in Crime
\nNo.302 of 2000 under Sections 341 and 324 I.P.C., which would show that the
\nfirst accused claimed that he was assaulted by P.W.1 and when Sempu Ravi
\nattempted to stab him, he snatched the knife from Ravi and he stabbed Sempu Ravi
\nwith knife and the another accused Ganesan also stabbed him with knife. On the
\nexamination of the accused under Section 313(1) Cr.P.C., first accused gave a
\nstatement which would show that when the accused were coming near Native High
\nSchool, the first accused was attacked by P.W.1 with wooden log and Sempu Ravi
\nattacked him with knife. When he attempted to stop him from attacking, there was
\na scuffle and both of them rolled and due to that the victim sustained injury.
\nThe statement of the first accused is contrary to the complaint given in Crime
\nNo.302 of 2000.  The evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 would show that the victim was
\nattacked by the accused, so P.W.1 came there and attacked the first accused with
\nwooden log. When a father on seeing his son attacked by somebody, naturally he
\nwould rush to rescue his son when he is in danger. Further, the occurrence took
\nplace near the house of the victim. This would go to show that only the accused
\nare the aggressors.\n<\/p>\n
\t20.Further, the learned counsel for the appellants would submit that P.W.3
\nis the friend of the victim, so his evidence has to be rejected.  The evidence
\nof P.W.3 cannot be rejected merely because he  is the friend of the deceased and
\nhe was residing in the same street in which the deceased was residing.  Further,
\nthe learned counsel would submit that P.W.3 did not spoke about the attack on
\nthe first accused by  P.W.1. P.W.1 himself admitted that he attacked the first
\naccused. So the evidence of P.W.3 cannot be rejected because he has not spoken
\nabout the attack made on the first accused by P.W.1. Moreover the occurrence is
\ntrue and P.W.3 saw the occurrence in the sodium light and after the occurrence
\nhe left the scene of occurrence.  If really, P.W.3 is the friend of the
\ndeceased, certainly he would have taken the victim to the hospital.  But he has
\nnot done so.  This would go to show that he is not interested in the victim.
\nSo, on careful consideration of the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 3, this Court is of
\nthe considered view that they are speaking the truth and there is no reason to
\nreject their evidence.\n<\/p>\n
\t21.The occurrence took place near the house of the victim.  Though in
\n313(1) questioning the first accused claimed that the victim sustained injuries
\ndue to scuffling, 15 injuries were caused on the victim.  This would go to show
\nthat the first accused is not speaking the truth. The second accused also
\nattacked the deceased.  So, it is clear that both the accused got have intention
\nto murder the accused because there was previous enmity between the victim and
\nthe first accused.  Further, criminal cases are pending against each of them
\nbased on the complaint given by them.  So, the accused had intention to murder
\nthe victim and accordingly they murdered the victim and caused grievous injury
\nto P.W.1. So, we find no reason to interfere with the well reasoned finding of
\nthe trial Court. Hence, there is no merit in the appeal and the same is liable
\nto be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
\t22.Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed and the conviction of the
\nappellants\/A1 and A4 under Section 302 r\/w 34 and 326 I.P.C. by the Trial Court
\nis confirmed. The period of imprisonment already undergone by the appellant\/A1
\nand A2 shall be given
\nset off. The sentences shall run concurrently. The respondent is directed to
\ntake steps to procure the accused for undergoing remaining period of sentence.\n<\/p>\n
sj<\/p>\n
To\n<\/p>\n
1.The Additional District and Sessions Judge
\n  cum Chief Judicial Magistrate,
\n  Tanjavur at Kumbakonam.\n<\/p>\n
2.The Inspector of Police,
\n  Kumbakonam East Police Station.\n<\/p>\n
3.The Public Prosecutor,
\n  Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
\n  Madurai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court K.Karthik vs State By The Inspector Of Police on 29 January, 2010 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29\/01\/2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.MURGESEN and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRL.A.No.1106 OF 2002 1.K.Karthik 2.S.Ganesan … Appellants\/A1 and A2 Vs State by the Inspector of Police, Kumbakonam […]<\/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-85860","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nK.Karthik vs State By The Inspector Of Police on 29 January, 2010 - 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\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"K.Karthik vs State By The Inspector Of Police on 29 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-10-16T08:14:57+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=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"K.Karthik vs State By The Inspector Of Police on 29 January, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-10-16T08:14:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010\"},\"wordCount\":2619,\"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\\\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010\",\"name\":\"K.Karthik vs State By The Inspector Of Police on 29 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-10-16T08:14:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"K.Karthik vs State By The Inspector Of Police on 29 January, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"K.Karthik vs State By The Inspector Of Police on 29 January, 2010 - 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\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"K.Karthik vs State By The Inspector Of Police on 29 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-10-16T08:14:57+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":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"K.Karthik vs State By The Inspector Of Police on 29 January, 2010","datePublished":"2010-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-10-16T08:14:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010"},"wordCount":2619,"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\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010","name":"K.Karthik vs State By The Inspector Of Police on 29 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-01-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-10-16T08:14:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-karthik-vs-state-by-the-inspector-of-police-on-29-january-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"K.Karthik vs State By The Inspector Of Police on 29 January, 2010"}]},{"@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\/85860","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=85860"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/85860\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=85860"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=85860"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=85860"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}