Madras High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment for Murder of Wife by Husband in Drunken Rage. Conviction Under Section 302 IPC Confirmed Based on Eyewitness Testimony and Dying Declaration.

High Court: Madras High Court In Favour of Prosecution
  • 15
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The appellant, Murugesan, was convicted under Section 302 IPC for the murder of his wife, Revathy, and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution case was that the accused, a habitual drunkard, used to beat and harass the deceased for money. On 15.02.2015, at about 9.00 p.m., the accused, in a drunken state, abused and beat the deceased outside their house, caught her by the hair, and forcibly took her inside. Neighbours intervened but were told not to interfere. Later, the accused informed his sister and brother-in-law that his wife was unwell, and they found her dead. The deceased's mother (PW1) and brother (PW2) deposed about the deceased's complaints of harassment. The neighbours (PW3, PW4, PW9, PW12) testified to the beating incident. The medical evidence confirmed the cause of death as due to injuries sustained. The trial court convicted the accused. On appeal, the High Court upheld the conviction, holding that the dying declaration and eyewitness testimony were credible and sufficient to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Conviction based on eyewitness testimony and dying declaration - The appellant was convicted for murdering his wife by beating her in a drunken state. The court held that the dying declaration and consistent eyewitness accounts proved the guilt beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 1-10)

B) Evidence Law - Dying Declaration - Admissibility - The deceased's statement to her mother and brother regarding harassment and the incident was treated as a dying declaration. The court found it reliable and corroborated by medical evidence. (Paras 5-8)

C) Criminal Procedure - Appeal against Conviction - Section 374 CrPC - The High Court, in appeal, re-appreciated the evidence and found no reason to interfere with the trial court's findings. (Paras 1-10)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC for the murder of his wife is sustainable based on the evidence on record.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The appeal is dismissed. The judgment of conviction and sentence dated 09.08.2017 in S.C.No.130/2015 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, (Mahalir Needhi Mandram) Mahila Court, Coimbatore is confirmed.

Law Points

  • Murder
  • Section 302 IPC
  • Life Imprisonment
  • Dying Declaration
  • Eyewitness Testimony
  • Circumstantial Evidence
  • Motive
  • Drunkenness not a defence
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (MAD) (01) 164

Crl.A.No.700 of 2019

2026-01-06

P.VELMURUGAN, M.JOTHIRAMAN

Mr.M.Rajkumar for M/s.T.Muruganantham, Mr.A.Damodaran Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Ms.M.Arifa Thasneem

Murugesan

The State represented by The Inspector of Police, Pollachi Town East Police Station, Coimbatore District.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against conviction and sentence for murder under Section 302 IPC.

Remedy Sought

Appellant sought to set aside the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 09.08.2017 in S.C.No.130/2015 passed by the Sessions Court (Mahalir Needhi Mandram) Mahila Court, Coimbatore.

Filing Reason

Appellant was convicted for murdering his wife by beating her in a drunken state.

Previous Decisions

Trial court convicted the appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/- with default sentence.

Issues

Whether the conviction under Section 302 IPC is sustainable based on the evidence on record.

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant argued that the evidence was insufficient and the dying declaration was unreliable. Respondent argued that the eyewitness testimony and dying declaration proved the guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Ratio Decidendi

The dying declaration and consistent eyewitness testimony of neighbours, coupled with medical evidence, proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Drunkenness is not a defence for murder.

Judgment Excerpts

This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant / sole accused challenging the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 09.08.2017 made in S.C.No.130 of 2015 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, (Mahalir Needhi Mandram) Mahila Court, Coimbatore in and by which the appellant was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to undergo Life Imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment. The accused caught hold of deceased hair, forcibly took the deceased inside the house and thereafter, they all returned back to their houses respectively.

Procedural History

The trial court convicted the appellant on 09.08.2017. The appellant filed an appeal under Section 374(3) CrPC before the High Court, which was heard and dismissed on 06.01.2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 302
  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 374(3)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Employer's Writ Petition in Bonus Dispute Under Amended Section 12 of Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. The court upheld the Industrial Court's finding that denial of bonus based on Rs.3,500 salary limit constitutes an unfair la...
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Upholds Life Imprisonment for Murder of Wife by Husband in Drunken Rage. Conviction Under Section 302 IPC Confirmed Based on Eyewitness Testimony and Dying Declaration.