This maxim refers to an examination, investigation, or process that takes place after death. A post mortem examination of a body often needed to determine the time and cause of death; the stiffening called rigor mortis is one post mortem change that doctors look at to determine when death occurred.
For an examination of a dead body or to determine the cause of death, the hospital will carry out a post-mortem’.
Amit v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2003 S.C. 3131
In rape and murder case, the post mortem report was that there was commission of sexual assault on the girl before her death. The court said that it was open to the accused to criticise the recitals in the report without giving an opportunity to the doctor to explain the points of criticism.
State of Karnataka v. Papanaika, AIR 2004 S.C. 4967
In this case the doctor, who treated the inj8ured when he was brought to the hospital, did not mention all the injuries. After his death, all injuries found on his person were mentioned in the detail in the post mortem report. The statement of injuries also corresponded with the version of prosecution witnesses. The court said that there was no reason to disbelieve the post mortem report.
Boraiah Alias Shekar vs State , 2003 CriLJ 1031
In this case the genuineness of the document post mortem report is not disputed by the defence. The defence Counsel had no objection to mark the document in evidence and therefore there was no prohibition for the Court, which had admitted the document in evidence to rely upon to find corroboration or contradiction to the other evidence on record. Therefore, we are of the opinion that where post-mortem report is marked by consent and where its genuineness is not disputed, it is clearly admissible evidence. Notwithstanding the fact that the author of the post-mortem report is not called into the Court to give evidence, specially where the defence has not chosen to cross-examine the post-mortem Doctor..
Edited by Sree Ramya
Approved & Published – Sakshi Raje