{"id":101475,"date":"2010-03-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-03-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010"},"modified":"2016-02-15T03:02:43","modified_gmt":"2016-02-14T21:32:43","slug":"appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010","title":{"rendered":"Appearance : vs Mr Hh Parikh on 10 March, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Appearance : vs Mr Hh Parikh on 10 March, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A.L.Dave,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Bankim.N.Mehta,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/1236\/1999\t 6\/ 6\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 1236 of 1999\n \n\n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE \n\n \n\n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA\n \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo\n\t\t\tbe referred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n=========================================\n\n\n \n\nSUNIL\nDEVISING RAJPUT \n\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT \n\n \n\n=========================================\n \nAppearance : \nMR\nRS PANJWANI for the Appellant \nMR HH PARIKH, APP for the\nRespondent \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 10\/03\/2010 \n\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA)<\/p>\n<p>\tThe<br \/>\nappellant convict has challenged the judgment and order of conviction<br \/>\nand sentence rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara<br \/>\non 16.10.1999 convicting him for the offences punishable under<br \/>\nsections 302 and 498-A of the IPC and sentencing him to undergo life<br \/>\nimprisonment for the offence under section 302 of the IPC and to<br \/>\nundergo RI for one year for the offence punishable under section<br \/>\n498-A of the IPC.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tAccording<br \/>\nto the prosecution, the accused was married to deceased Bhanuben and<br \/>\nthere was marital discord between them.  It was alleged that on<br \/>\n21.8.1998 at about 8:00 in the morning, the accused poured kerosene<br \/>\nover Bhanuben and ignited the matchstick.  On account of that, she<br \/>\nsustained severe burn injuries and succumbed to the injuries in the<br \/>\nHospital.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tOn<br \/>\nthe basis of the first information report lodged by deceased<br \/>\nBhanuben, offence was registered and investigation was started.<br \/>\nDuring the course of investigation, dying declaration of Bhanuben was<br \/>\nrecorded and various panchnamas were drawn and statements of the<br \/>\nwitnesses were recorded.  At the end of investigation, charge sheet<br \/>\ncame to be filed against the accused for the aforesaid offences.  As<br \/>\nthe offence was triable by the Sessions Court, the case was committed<br \/>\nto the Sessions Court and it was registered as Sessions Case No.9 of<br \/>\n1999.  The learned Additional Sessions Judge framed charge for the<br \/>\naforesaid offences against the accused.  The accused denied having<br \/>\ncommitted the offence and claimed to be tried.  Therefore, the<br \/>\nprosecution adduced evidence.  On completion of recording of<br \/>\nevidence, the incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence<br \/>\nagainst the accused were explained to him.  The accused in his<br \/>\nfurther statement recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal<br \/>\nProcedure, 1973, stated that he is innocent and he has three minor<br \/>\nchildren and there is no one to look after them.  It was also stated<br \/>\nthat at present his mother was keeping the children and she is aged<br \/>\nabout 65 years and therefore, mercy should be shown.  After hearing<br \/>\nthe learned Additional Public Prosecutor and learned advocate for the<br \/>\naccused, the trial Court recorded that the prosecution has<br \/>\nsuccessfully proved the charge levelled against the accused beyond<br \/>\nreasonable doubt and therefore, convicted him.  Being aggrieved by<br \/>\nthe said decision, the accused has preferred this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tWe<br \/>\nhave heard learned advocate Mr. Panjwani for the appellant and<br \/>\nlearned APP Mr. Parikh at length and in great detail.  We have also<br \/>\nperused the impugned judgment and record and proceedings of the trial<br \/>\nCourt.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tLearned<br \/>\nadvocate for the appellant has restricted his arguments and that he<br \/>\ndoes not dispute the incident, but the deceased committed suicide and<br \/>\ntherefore, the appellant accused could not have been convicted for<br \/>\nthe murder.  He has also submitted that the dying declaration suffers<br \/>\nfrom infirmity as the doctor has not made endorsement on the dying<br \/>\ndeclaration with regard to state of mind of the declarant.  He has<br \/>\nrelied upon the decision of <a href=\"\/doc\/1256279\/\">Kanti Lal v. State of Rajasthan<\/a> with<br \/>\nArvind Kumar v. State of Rajasthan reported in 2009(2) GLH 688.  He<br \/>\nhas also submitted that the dying declaration and the FIR were<br \/>\nallegedly recorded at the same time which could not have been done<br \/>\nand therefore, the learned trial Judge committed an error in relying<br \/>\nupon both these documents and therefore, the impugned judgment is<br \/>\nrequired to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tPer<br \/>\ncontra, learned APP has submitted that the dying declaration is<br \/>\ntrustworthy, cogent and reliable as the doctor has made endorsement<br \/>\nwith regard to state of mind of the deceased on the yadi sent by the<br \/>\nauthority to the Executive Magistrate and it is not true that the FIR<br \/>\nand the dying declaration were recorded at the same time.  He has<br \/>\nalso submitted that the evidence indicates that the deceased and the<br \/>\naccused were married before about 3 and ? years and there is nothing<br \/>\non record to indicate that the injuries were suicidal and therefore,<br \/>\nno interference is warranted in the impugned judgment and therefore,<br \/>\nthe appeal deserves to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tThe<br \/>\nevidence of witness Dr. Kishor Pramodray Desai (Exh-11) who performed<br \/>\nthe postmortem, indicates that the deceased had burn injuries on her<br \/>\nentire body.  According to the doctor, said burn injuries were not<br \/>\npossible on account of suicide.  The postmortem report (Exh-12)<br \/>\nindicates that the cause of death was shock on account of burns.<br \/>\nThis evidence clearly indicates that the deceased did not commit<br \/>\nsuicide and it was a homicidal death, therefore, the submission that<br \/>\nthe deceased committed suicide, cannot be accepted.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tThe<br \/>\nprosecution examined Executive Magistrate PW 4 Lataben Rohitchandra<br \/>\nat Exh-24.  The witness recorded dying declaration of deceased<br \/>\nBhanuben.  The evidence of this witness indicates that on receipt of<br \/>\nyadi Exh-25, she went to the Hospital, inquired from the doctor about<br \/>\nthe health of the patient and was informed by the doctor that the<br \/>\npatient was conscious and in a position to give her dying<br \/>\ndeclaration.  It also indicates that the opinion was obtained on yadi<br \/>\nExh-25.  The evidence of this witness further indicates that the<br \/>\ndeceased was conscious throughout recording of the dying declaration.<br \/>\n The witness has been cross-examined by the accused.  The prosecution<br \/>\nproduced yadi given to the Executive Magistrate at Exh-25.  The<br \/>\nendorsement made by the doctor indicates that the patient is<br \/>\nconscious and oriented.  The endorsement was made at 12:00 p.m.  The<br \/>\ndying declaration is produced at Exh-26.  It is recorded between<br \/>\n12:05 and 12:35 hrs.  It was tried to suggest that there is<br \/>\ndiscrepancy in the timing between the yadi and dying declaration and<br \/>\ntherefore, the dying declaration could not have been relied upon, in<br \/>\nour view, the difference is of only about five minutes.  There may be<br \/>\ndifference in timings of watches of the two different persons.<br \/>\nTherefore, this difference of five minutes is insignificant  and on<br \/>\nthat count, we cannot brush aside the dying declaration.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tBefore<br \/>\nrecording of the dying declaration, endorsement of the doctor with<br \/>\nregard to state of mind of the deceased was obtained on the yadi.<br \/>\nTherefore, it cannot be said that no endorsement in that regard was<br \/>\nobtained on the dying declaration and therefore, this submission<br \/>\ncannot be accepted.  The decision of Kantilal (supra) relied upon by<br \/>\nthe appellant is not applicable, as there is endorsement of Doctor on<br \/>\nyadi Exh-25.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tThe<br \/>\ndeceased also lodged FIR with regard to the incident.  The<br \/>\nprosecution has produced the FIR at Exh-34.  It is alleged in the FIR<br \/>\nthat the accused was responsible for the burn injuries.  The<br \/>\nprosecution examined PW 7 Babubhai Ishwarbhai Patel (Exh-33), who<br \/>\nrecorded the FIR.  The evidence of this witness indicates that he<br \/>\nwent to the Hospital at 11:00 a.m. and recorded the FIR, Exh-34.<br \/>\nThis evidence clearly indicates that before recording the dying<br \/>\ndeclaration between 12:10 and 12:35 hrs, the FIR was already lodged,<br \/>\ntherefore, the contention that the dying declaration and the FIR were<br \/>\nlodged at the same time cannot be accepted.  It is also submitted by<br \/>\nthe learned advocate for the appellant that the injuries were found<br \/>\non the accused, but the prosecution has not explained the injuries.<br \/>\nIn our considered view, in view of the fact that the accused has<br \/>\ntaken an absolutely false defence and denied having his involvement<br \/>\nin the incident, prosecution was not required to explain the injuries<br \/>\nand therefore, this submission also cannot be accepted.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tIn<br \/>\nview of above evidence, it clearly emerges that the deceased<br \/>\nsustained homicidal burn injuries and the accused was responsible for<br \/>\nsuch burn injuries.  Therefore, the learned trial Judge was justified<br \/>\nin recording conviction of the accused under section 302 of the IPC.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\tAs<br \/>\nregards the conviction under section 498-A of the IPC, there is no<br \/>\ncogent, reliable and convincing evidence to connect the accused with<br \/>\nthe offence.  Therefore, the learned trial Judge committed error in<br \/>\nconvicting the accused for the offence under section 498-A of the<br \/>\nIPC.  Therefore, the conviction thereunder is required to be set<br \/>\naside.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\tIn<br \/>\nview of above, the appeal partly succeeds.  The judgment and order of<br \/>\nconviction and sentence rendered by learned Additional Sessions<br \/>\nJudge, Vadodara on 16.10.1999 in Sessions Case No.9 of 1999 for the<br \/>\noffence under section 302 of the IPC is sustained and conviction<br \/>\nunder section 498-A of the IPC is set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>(A.L.\n<\/p>\n<p>DAVE, J.)<\/p>\n<p>(BANKIM.N.MEHTA,<br \/>\nJ.)<\/p>\n<p>shekhar\/-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Appearance : vs Mr Hh Parikh on 10 March, 2010 Author: A.L.Dave,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Bankim.N.Mehta,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/1236\/1999 6\/ 6 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1236 of 1999 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA ========================================= 1 Whether [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-101475","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Appearance : vs Mr Hh Parikh on 10 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Appearance : vs Mr Hh Parikh on 10 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-03-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-02-14T21:32:43+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Appearance : vs Mr Hh Parikh on 10 March, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-14T21:32:43+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1389,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010\",\"name\":\"Appearance : vs Mr Hh Parikh on 10 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-14T21:32:43+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Appearance : vs Mr Hh Parikh on 10 March, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Appearance : vs Mr Hh Parikh on 10 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Appearance : vs Mr Hh Parikh on 10 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-03-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-02-14T21:32:43+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Appearance : vs Mr Hh Parikh on 10 March, 2010","datePublished":"2010-03-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-14T21:32:43+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010"},"wordCount":1389,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010","name":"Appearance : vs Mr Hh Parikh on 10 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-03-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-14T21:32:43+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-hh-parikh-on-10-march-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Appearance : vs Mr Hh Parikh on 10 March, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101475","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=101475"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/101475\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=101475"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=101475"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=101475"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}