{"id":98047,"date":"2002-11-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-11-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002"},"modified":"2016-11-01T13:48:28","modified_gmt":"2016-11-01T08:18:28","slug":"chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002","title":{"rendered":"Chandramoorthy vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 November, 2002"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Chandramoorthy vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 November, 2002<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED: 15\/11\/2002\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.SHANMUGAM\nAND\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.DINAKARAN\n\nCriminal Appeal No.616 of 1998\n\n1. Chandramoorthy\n2. Lakshmanaperumal                                             .. Appellants\n\n-Vs-\n\nState of Tamil Nadu\nrep. by the Inspector of Police\nKayathar, Tuticorin District.                           .. Respondent\n\nPRAYER:  Against the judgment dated 20.7.1998 in S.C.No.124  of  1994  of  the\nlearned Principal Sessions Judge, Tuticorin.\n\n!For Appellants         :       Mr.A.Padmanabhan\n                                for Mr.M.S.Kandasamy\n\n^For Respondent         :       Mr.A.Navaneethakrishnan\n                                Addl.  Public Prosecutor\n\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>P.D.DINAKARAN,J.\n<\/p>\n<p>        The appellants are the accused 1 and 2 in S.C.No.124 of  1995  on  the<br \/>\nfile  of  the  learned Principal Sessions Judge, Tuticorin, who were convicted<br \/>\nfor an offence punishable under Sections 341 and 302 read with Section  34  of<br \/>\nthe  Indian Penal Code and sentenced for one month simple imprisonment for the<br \/>\noffence under Section 341 of Indian Penal Code and for life  imprisonment  for<br \/>\nthe  offence  punishable  under  Section 302 read with Section 34 Indian Penal<br \/>\nCode, both to run concurrently, by judgment dated 20.7.1998.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.  The appellants, who are accused 1 and 2, along  with  one  another<br \/>\naccused  by  name Dharmar were charged for an offence punishable under Section<br \/>\n341 and 302 read with 34 Indian Penal Code with regard to  alleged  murder  of<br \/>\none  Pitchiah  at about 6.00 pm on 17.12.1993 between Kothali and Kollankinaru<br \/>\nVillage, at the outskirts  of  Kothali  village  within  the  jurisdiction  of<br \/>\nKadambur  Police  Station,  by inflicting fatal injuries on the vital parts of<br \/>\nthe body of the deceased Pitchiah, which resulted in his instantaneous death.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.1.  The case of the prosecution is that the deceased  Pitchiah,  who<br \/>\nis the  husband  of  P.W.1, had three daughters.  The first two daughters were<br \/>\nalready given in marriage and the third daughter, Ayyammal, who  was  examined<br \/>\nas P.W.3, was asked for marriage to the first accused (Chandramoorthy).  Since<br \/>\nP.W.1  and  her family members were not willing for the marriage between P.W.3<br \/>\nand first accused, P.W.3 was given in marriage  to  one  Radhakrishnan.    The<br \/>\nmarriage between Radhakrishnan and P.W.3 sowed the seeds of enmity between the<br \/>\nfamily of the deceased and the first accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.2.   On  the  fateful  day,  namely  on  17.12.1993  at 4.00 pm, the<br \/>\nappellants, who are accused 1 and 2, along with one  another  accused  Dharmar<br \/>\ncame  to  the  house  of  P.W.1  and threatened P.W.3 that they would see that<br \/>\nPitchiah, who had gone to Kothali Esakkiamman temple, would not  return  home.<br \/>\nAt  that  time, P.W.1\u2019s second son-in-law Mariappan, who was examined as P.W.2<br \/>\ncame to the reside nce of  P.W.1  from  Kovilpatti.    Apprehending  that  the<br \/>\naccused might cause some danger to her husband Pitchiah, P.Ws.1 and P.W.2 went<br \/>\nin search of  Pitchiah  from  4.30  pm.  When P.Ws.  1 and 2 came near Kothali<br \/>\nvillage at about 6.00 pm, they saw accused 1 and 2,  along  with  one  another<br \/>\naccused Dharmar sitting under the Udai tree.  When Pitchiah was returning from<br \/>\nEsakkiamman  temple  on  the  way to his house, the first accused ran and gave<br \/>\ncuts to Pitchiah by using an Aruval and the same was thwarted by Pitchiah with<br \/>\nboth hands.  The right hand wrist of Pitchiah was almost severed and  hanging.<br \/>\nIn the meanwhile, another accused Dharmar ran and cut Pitchiah by an Aruval on<br \/>\nthe  right  hand  shoulder  and  the second accused ran and cut Pitchiah by an<br \/>\nAruval at his neck, and as a result Pitchiah fell down immediately.  The first<br \/>\naccused again cut Pitchiah  at  his  chin  and  another  accused  Dharmar  cut<br \/>\nPitchiah by  an  Aruval  on  the  left  flank.    As  a  result, Pitchiah died<br \/>\ninstantaneously on the spot.  On hearing P.Ws.1 and 2 shouting and crying, all<br \/>\nthe three accused ran away from the scene of occurrence with their weapons.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.3.  As it was raining at that time, nobody came forward to  help  P.<br \/>\nWs.1  and  2  and  therefore,  they returned home and on the next day morning,<br \/>\nnamely on 18.12.1993, they went to Kadambur  Police  Station  and  lodged  the<br \/>\ncomplaint, which is marked as Ex.P1.  On receipt of the complaint (Ex.P1), the<br \/>\nInvestigation  Officer  (P.W.13)  went  to the spot in the presence of Village<br \/>\nAdministrative Officer (P.W.5) and  Village  Assistant  (Thalaiyari)  (P.W.6),<br \/>\nprepared  a  sketch of the scene of occurrence, which is marked as Ex.P18, and<br \/>\nconducted inquest on the dead body of deceased Pitchiah  in  the  presence  of<br \/>\nwitnesses  and  Panchayatdars  and  prepared  inquest report marked as Ex.P19,<br \/>\nexamined witnesses and recorded their statements and  thereafter  shifted  the<br \/>\nbody of deceased Pitchiah to Government Hospital.  Postmortem was conducted by<br \/>\nDr.Meena, who was examined as P.W.8, through whom a postmortem certificate was<br \/>\nmarked as  Ex.P12.  On 20.12.1993, the Investigation Officer (P.W.13) arrested<br \/>\nthe accused 1 and 2 herein and one another accused Dharmar.  During the course<br \/>\nof investigation, the third accused Dharmar  died  and  therefore,  the  final<br \/>\nreport  was  filed  only against the first and second accused for the offences<br \/>\nunder Sections 341 and 302 read with 34 Indian Penal Code, pursuant  to  which<br \/>\nthe case was committed for trial.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.1.   On behalf of the prosecution 13 witnesses (P.Ws.1 to 13) were examined,<br \/>\nthrough whom 21 documents (Exs.P1 to P21) were marked, of which it is  suffice<br \/>\nto refer the following witnesses and documents that are relevant.  The wife of<br \/>\nthe  deceased  Pitchiah was examined as P.W.1; son-in-law of deceased Pitchiah<br \/>\nand P.W.1 was examined as P.W.2, one Ayyammal viz., third daughter of deceased<br \/>\nPitchiah and P.W.1, was examined as P.W.3.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.2.  P.W.3 deposed that the accused 1 and 2 along with  one  another  accused<br \/>\nDharmar  came  to the house of the deceased and P.W.1, where P.W.3 was present<br \/>\nand threatened that the deceased Pitchiah, who had gone to Kothali  Esakiamman<br \/>\ntemple, would  not  return  home.    P.Ws.1  and 2 were cited as eye-witnesses<br \/>\nnarrating the occurrence.  P.W.4 is the Poojari  of  Esakkiamman  temple,  who<br \/>\ndeposed  that the deceased Pitchiah came to the temple on the fateful evening.<br \/>\nP.Ws.5  and  6  are  Village  Administrative  Officer  and  Village  Assistant<br \/>\n(Thalaiyari),  who  spoke  about  the  inquest  conducted  on the body and the<br \/>\ninvestigation by P.W.1 3 based on the complaint  lodged  by  P.W.1  marked  as<br \/>\nEx.P1.  P.W.8 is the Doctor, who conducted postmortem, through whom Postmortem<br \/>\nCertificate marked as Ex.P.12 was marked.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.  In the light of the evidence set out above, the learned Principal Sessions<br \/>\nJudge,  Tuticorin, by judgment dated 20.7.1998 in S.C.No.124 of 1995 found the<br \/>\naccused 1 and 2 guilty for the offence punishable under Section  341  and  302<br \/>\nread  with  34  of  Indian  Penal Code and sentenced the accused for one month<br \/>\nsimple imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 341 Indian  Penal<br \/>\nCode  and  life imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 302 read<br \/>\nwith 34 Indian Penal Code, both to run concurrently.  Hence the above appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.1.  Mr.A.Padmanabhan, learned counsel for the appellants effectively brought<br \/>\nout the anomalies in the case of the  prosecution  pointing  out  the  strange<br \/>\nconduct  and behaviour of P.Ws.1 and 2 immediately after the alleged murder of<br \/>\nPitchiah by the accused 1 and 2 and one another Dharmar, which was said to  be<br \/>\nwitnessed  by  them,  and  contends  that the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 are not<br \/>\ntrustworthy.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.2.   Mr.A.Padmanabhan,  learned  counsel  for  the  appellants  invited  our<br \/>\nattention  to  the  improbabilities in the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2, which was<br \/>\nthe foundation to the case of the prosecution.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.  We have given careful consideration to  the  submissions  of  the  learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the appellants and have minutely examined the evidence.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.  P.W.1  is  the  wife  of  the  deceased  Pitchiah.    P.W.2  is the second<br \/>\nson-in-law of the deceased Pitchiah and P.W.1.  As per the evidence of  P.Ws.1<br \/>\nand  2,  the  occurrence  had  taken place at about 6.00 pm on 17.12.1993 in a<br \/>\njungle like place, which is hardly 2 kilometers away from the permanent  place<br \/>\nof residence  of  P.W.1  and the deceased.  Both P.Ws.1 and 2 have stated that<br \/>\nthe occurrence had taken place at 6.00 pm and it was raining at that time  and<br \/>\ntherefore,  they  could  not  get any help from villagers, hence they returned<br \/>\nhome and stayed that night in the  house  and  went  to  the  Kadambur  Police<br \/>\nStation  next  day  morning at 8.00 am and lodged a complaint marked as Ex.P1.<br \/>\nThis portion of evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2 is totally unbelievable.  It is quite<br \/>\nimprobable to imagine P.W.1, wife of the deceased Pitchiah,  who  is  said  to<br \/>\nhave  witnessed  the  heinous  murder  of her husband by her naked eyes, would<br \/>\nleave the body of her husband at the scene of occurrence  itself  unmindfully,<br \/>\neven  though  it  was raining, and return to her house, spend the night at her<br \/>\nresidence and then lodge the complaint on the  next  day  at  Kadambur  Police<br \/>\nstation.   It  is  not her case that there was no male member in the family to<br \/>\nassist because P.W.2 himself is second son-in-law of the deceased Pitchiah and<br \/>\nP.W.1, who indeed went in  search  of  Pitchiah  on  the  eve  of  17.12.1993,<br \/>\napprehending  accused  would cause danger to the deceased, and is also said to<br \/>\nbe an eyewitness to the occurrence.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.  That apart, P.Ws.1 and 2 have stated that the house of  Village  Assistant<br \/>\n(Thalaiyari)(P.W.6) is located five houses away from the house of the deceased<br \/>\nand P.W.1.  P.Ws.1 and 2, who are to have directly witnessed the brutal murder<br \/>\nof  Pitchiah  at  about  6.00  pm  on 17.12.1993 , even after returning to the<br \/>\nvillage and staying that night in her residence, have  not  chosen  to  inform<br \/>\nabout the  occurrence  to  the  Village  Assistant (Thalaiyari) (P.W.6).  This<br \/>\nconduct and behaviour of P.  Ws.1 and 2, who  are  nonetheless  the  wife  and<br \/>\nson-in-law of the deceased Pitchiah respectively, raises doubt in our minds to<br \/>\nquestion the very credibility of the testimony of P.Ws.1 and 2.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.   Moreover,  P.Ws.1  and 2 had chosen to lodge the complaint to the police<br \/>\nabout the atrocious murder only at about 8.00  am  on  18.12.1993  before  the<br \/>\nKadambur police station.    In  the complaint, marked as Ex.  P1, P.Ws.1 and 2<br \/>\nhave specifically stated that they directly witnessed the overt act of each of<br \/>\nthe accused attacking the deceased  Pitchiah  on  vital  parts  of  the  body,<br \/>\ninflicting  fatal  injuries by aruval, which caused the instantaneous death of<br \/>\nthe deceased Pitchiah.  Even though P.W.1 had  explained  that  since  it  was<br \/>\nraining on the night of 17.12.1993, they could not lodge the complaint earlier<br \/>\nthan  8.00  am on 1 8.12.1993, no convincing explanation comes out from P.Ws.1<br \/>\nand  2  for  not  reporting  the  occurrence  immediately   to   the   Village<br \/>\nAdministrative  Officer  (P.W.5)  or Village Assistant (Thalaiyari) (P.W.6) or<br \/>\nany of the villagers, in spite of their direct witness to the cruel murder  of<br \/>\nthe deceased  Pitchiah.    The story of the prosecution in this regard, in our<br \/>\nconsidered opinion, is highly improbable, unreliable and therefore  is  to  be<br \/>\nrejected  as  totally  fanciful  and  imaginary  as  the  same is tainted with<br \/>\nconcocted evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.  The explanation of P.Ws.1 and 2 that it  was  raining  on  the  night  of<br \/>\n17.12.1993  and  therefore,  leaving  the body of the deceased Pitchiah at the<br \/>\nscene of occurrence, they returned to the village, stayed that night and  then<br \/>\nwent  to  the Kadambur Police Station next day at 8.0 0 am, and the hypothesis<br \/>\nsuggested for their conduct, viz., leaving the body of  the  deceased  at  the<br \/>\nscene  of  occurrence  as  it  was  raining  after  the  occurence,  is in our<br \/>\nconsidered opinion, inconceivable and farcical, and gives room to question the<br \/>\nvery credibility of their evidence.  Every evidence relied  upon  for  a  safe<br \/>\nconviction  should have a probative link, strong or weak, but the same must be<br \/>\nmade out with reasonability and certainty.  Once the evidence of P.Ws.1 and 2,<br \/>\nwhich is the foundation to the prosecution case is itself collapsed  for  want<br \/>\nof  reliability  and  credibility, we are convinced that it may not be safe to<br \/>\nconvict the accused merely based on the evidence of the Investigation  Officer<br \/>\n(P.W.13),   Doctor  (P.W.8)  who  conducted  the  postmortem,  and  postmortem<br \/>\ncertificate  marked  as  Ex.P12,  in  the  absence  of  any  other  direct  or<br \/>\ncircumstantial evidence to hold the accused guilty.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.   Hence,  holding that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond<br \/>\nall reasonable doubt, we are obliged to interfere with the order of conviction<br \/>\nand sentence dated 20.7.1998 in S.C.No.124 of 1995 of  the  learned  Principal<br \/>\nSessions  Judge,  Tuticorin,  set  aside  the  same,  allow the appeal, with a<br \/>\ndirection to the respondent to  release  the  accused  forthwith,  unless  and<br \/>\notherwise they are required in any other crime.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index:  Yes<br \/>\nInternet:Yes<\/p>\n<p>Sasi<\/p>\n<p>To:\n<\/p>\n<p>1.  The Principal Sessions Judge, Tuticorin.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.  The District Collector, Tuticorin.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.  The Director General of Police, Chennai.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.  The Superintendent, Central Prison, Palayamkottai.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.  The Public Prosecutor, Chennai.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.  The Inspector of Police, Kayathar, Tuticorin Dist.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Chandramoorthy vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 November, 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 15\/11\/2002 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.SHANMUGAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.DINAKARAN Criminal Appeal No.616 of 1998 1. Chandramoorthy 2. Lakshmanaperumal .. Appellants -Vs- State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the Inspector of Police [&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-98047","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Chandramoorthy vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 November, 2002 - 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\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chandramoorthy vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 November, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002\" \/>\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=\"2002-11-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-01T08:18:28+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=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Chandramoorthy vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 November, 2002\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-11-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-01T08:18:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002\"},\"wordCount\":2030,\"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\\\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002\",\"name\":\"Chandramoorthy vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 November, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2002-11-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-01T08:18:28+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chandramoorthy vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 November, 2002\"}]},{\"@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":"Chandramoorthy vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 November, 2002 - 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\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chandramoorthy vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 November, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2002-11-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-01T08:18:28+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":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Chandramoorthy vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 November, 2002","datePublished":"2002-11-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-01T08:18:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002"},"wordCount":2030,"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\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002","name":"Chandramoorthy vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 November, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2002-11-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-01T08:18:28+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chandramoorthy-vs-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-15-november-2002#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chandramoorthy vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 November, 2002"}]},{"@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\/98047","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=98047"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/98047\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=98047"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=98047"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=98047"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}