Natural Death As Per Post Mortem Report : Supreme Court Upholds Discharge Of Accused In Murder Case

While upholding the discharge of appellants who were arrayed as accused for a murder of a deceased-woman, Supreme Court on Thursday (January 18) set-aside the finding of the High Court by noting that the expert testimony of the doctor who performed the autopsy of the deceased cannot be completely ignored while deciding the guilt of an accused.

“In the post-mortem, no injury was found on the chest or any other part of the body of the deceased. Therefore, taking the evidence of the respondent's father and other witnesses as it is, there was no material to proceed against the appellants in the private complaint filed by the respondent's father”, the Bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan noted.

Briefly put, it was alleged by the husband that three persons had assaulted his deceased wife with stick and kicks on her chest and stomach which ultimately led to the death of the deceased. Conversely, it was alleged by the appellant that the death caused to the deceased was natural.

The entire controversy of the case revolves around the expert testimony of the doctor who performed the post-mortem of the deceased. The post-mortem report of the doctor has categorically stated that the death of the deceased was natural coupled with the fact that no external injuries were found on the body of the deceased.

On the basis of the post-mortem report, the trial court has discharged the appellant of the alleged offence. Assailing the order of discharge of the appellants, the husband of the deceased filed a revision application before the High Court, that allowed the revision application and remanded back the matter to the trial court.

It is against the order of the High Court, the appellants, who were already discharge of the alleged offence has preferred the instant criminal appeal.

The Court after perusing the material evidence placed on record noted that the High Court was wrong in holding that the trial court has entered into a mini-trial.

“After having perused the order of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge dated 9th January 2009, we find that a mini-trial was not conducted. The Court has considered the case within four corners of its limited jurisdiction under Section 227 of the CrPC”, the court noted.

Further, the court has placed heavy reliance of the expert evidence of the doctor to come to the conclusion that the death of the deceased was not homicidal but natural.

“Thus, the expert witness examined by the respondent, who admittedly carried out a post-mortem on the body of the deceased, has categorically stated that the death of the deceased was natural. This is coupled with the fact that there were no external injuries found on the body of the deceased.”

While highlighting the contradiction in the deposition made by the deceased husband, the court observed as follows:

“The version of the respondent's father who was examined as PW-1 is that one of the appellants hit the deceased with a stick on her chest, and the other appellant repeatedly kicked her on her chest. In the post-mortem, no injury was found on the chest or any other part of the body of the deceased. Therefore, taking the evidence of the respondent's father and other witnesses as it is, there was no material to proceed against the appellants in the private complaint filed by the respondent's father.”

Thus, ultimately the court set aside the judgment of the High Court and restored the judgment of the trial court.

“The High Court, even after referring to the post-mortem certificate, has completely ignored the doctor's evidence. Hence, the impugned judgment and order cannot be sustained, and the same is set aside. The Judgment and order dated 9th January 2009 in Crl. Misc. Petition No.51 of 2008 in Sessions Case no. 270 of 2008 is restored”

Appeals are accordingly allowed.

Case Title: Ramalingam & Ors. v. N. Viswanathan

Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 45

Click here to read the judgment