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.

Vinayak Shivajirao vs State of Maharashtra.