In Modi's book of Medical Jurisprudence and Texicology, edited by CA
Franklin, twenty - first edition and also Parikhs Text Book of Medical
Jurisprudence and Texicology edited by Dr CK Parikh quoted in 1998 Cri LJ1558 at
page 1561(SC) none of the passages is of my help in the present case in view of
the facts mentioned above and in particular the circumstances that the body was
highly decomposed when it was discovered. Reference was made to the following
passage in the textbook on Medical Jurisprudence and Texicology by John Glister
Anti mortem and post mortem bruises. The signs are swelling of the tissues,
discoloration of the skin, extravasation of blood in to true skin, and
subcutaneous tissues with infiltration. When a raise is well developed, an
examiner is justified in assuming the view that it was produced during life.
Nevertheless for medico legal purposes ,a microscopically examination should be
made to verify the presence of unfiltered blood. Since infiltration is possible
only while the heart is beating the sign is conclusive that the injury was
produced during life. While molecular life remains in the tissues, considerable
violence applied to a dead body with a blunt instrument will produce a slight
degree of extravasations, but never to the same extent as during life and
infiltration of the tissues will be absent.
Suspected areas of bruising should always be incised to differentiate them from
colour Mark's due to hypothesis, since both condition may co exist in the same
region of the body. In bruising extravagated body is present,but in hypostasis,
the severed small are filled with blood and extravasations is absent.
In such circumstances the Court was unable to place any reliance on the opinion
of the doctor who conducted the post mortem.