{"id":103828,"date":"2009-10-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009"},"modified":"2015-07-24T09:18:47","modified_gmt":"2015-07-24T03:48:47","slug":"mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"Mankamma vs State Of Kerala on 8 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Mankamma vs State Of Kerala on 8 October, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: V.S.Sirpurkar<\/div>\n
Bench: V.S. Sirpurkar, Deepak Verma<\/div>\n
                                                                 REPORTABLE\n\n\n                                      IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA\n                            CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION\n\n\n                            CRIMINAL    APPEAL No.1198 OF 2003\n\n\n\nMANKAMMA                                                      ...      Appellant(s)\n\n                            Versus\nSTATE OF KERALA\n                                                               ...     Respondent(s)\n\n\n\n                                      J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
    V.S.SIRPURKAR, J.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
    1.         This     appeal   is     filed    by   the   accused    Mankamma<\/p>\n
    challenging her conviction for the offence punishable under<\/p>\n
    Section 306, IPC on the allegation that she abetted the<\/p>\n
    suicide    of     her   daughter-in-law,     Bindu.       All     the   three<\/p>\n
    courts below have found her guilty of that offence.                       The<\/p>\n
    first two courts had awarded            her the rigorous imprisonment<\/p>\n
    for two years with fine of Rs. 2,000\/- in default to undergo<\/p>\n
    rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months.<\/p>\n
    The High Court while confirming the sentence reduced the<\/p>\n
    sentence to one year rigorous imprisonment and also reduced<\/p>\n
    the amount of fine from Rs. 2,000\/- to Rs. 1,000\/-.<\/p>\n
    2.        The prosecution case in extremely short conspectus<\/p>\n
    is that Bindu was married to Prakasan, son of the appellant<\/p>\n
    and it was a love marriage.                 They belonged to different
\ncommunities and hence the marriage was not approved by the<\/p>\n
                                     -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
parents of Bindu.        So much so, Bindu ran away with Prakasan<\/p>\n
to get married .       The prosecution case reveals that there is<\/p>\n
one son born out of the wedlock.              Bindu was married in the<\/p>\n
year 1987 and was residing in the matrimonial house with her<\/p>\n
husband and the accused.          The incident in question had taken<\/p>\n
place on 15.06.1989 i.e. just within two years of their<\/p>\n
marriage.     On the said day              at about 8.30 a.m. it was<\/p>\n
reported by PW1, Vijayan           that Bindu had committed suicide<\/p>\n
by pouring kerosene on her body and set herself ablaze.                    On<\/p>\n
that       information     Crime     No.    189\/1989     was    registered.<\/p>\n
Inquest was held and post mortum was also conducted.                     PW9,<\/p>\n
the     Assistant     Commissioner     took       up   the     investigation<\/p>\n
initially    and     thereafter     PW11,    Sub-Inspector       of   Police,<\/p>\n
Jayendran K.,        completed the investigation and filed the<\/p>\n
chargesheet before the Court.               In all 11 witnesses were<\/p>\n
examined by the prosecution including the father, brother,<\/p>\n
sister-in-law of the deceased as also her friend, Ameer Jan.<\/p>\n
The allegation against the appellant are that because of her<\/p>\n
cruel    treatment    to   Bindu,    she    was    ultimately     driven   to<\/p>\n
commit suicide and that is how the accused had abetted her<\/p>\n
suicide and had committed offence under Section 306, IPC.<\/p>\n
There can be no doubt that all the three courts below have
\nheld the appellant guilty on the basis of the evidence led<\/p>\n
before them.          Ordinarily we would not have interfered in the<\/p>\n
matter     by     re-appreciating        the    evidence     as   this     court<\/p>\n
normally does not go into the task of re-appreciating the<\/p>\n
                                        -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
evidence. However, when it is found that the evidence has<\/p>\n
been appreciated in a mechanical manner and without proper<\/p>\n
consideration of facts and circumstances on record we                         in<\/p>\n
the interest of justice re-appreciate the evidence.                         That<\/p>\n
has happened here.\n<\/p>\n
3.        Mr. Jayanth Muthuraj, Learned counsel appearing on<\/p>\n
behalf    of     the   accused      painstakingly     took   us   through    the<\/p>\n
evidence. Besides the oral evidence, the prosecution also<\/p>\n
relied on two letters, one written by Bindu to her husband<\/p>\n
and the other written by her sister-in-law to her and her<\/p>\n
husband.        In support of his argument learned counsel points<\/p>\n
out that Bindu after her elopement with her husband Prakasan<\/p>\n
was not in contact with her own family members because she<\/p>\n
had married into a different caste.\n<\/p>\n
4.        We were taken through the evidence of the relation<\/p>\n
witnesses       and    it    is    pointed   out    from   that   evidence    by<\/p>\n
learned     counsel         that   insofar     as   the    evidence   of    PW2,<\/p>\n
Kumaran, father of the deceased is concerned he is totally<\/p>\n
silent about his personal knowledge regarding the treatment
\ngiven by the accused to the deceased.                      In his evidence he<\/p>\n
asserts that about two months prior to the death of Bindu<\/p>\n
when she came to his house she had told about the ill-<\/p>\n
treatment by the accused since no money was given to                           the<\/p>\n
baby of Bindu.          Very strangely, this witness kept quiet and<\/p>\n
did    not     bother    to    even    ask    his    son-in-law       about    the<\/p>\n
treatment meted out by his mother to Bindu.                    He admits that<\/p>\n
                                        -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
after the marriage for almost a year his family did not go<\/p>\n
to the house of          Prakasan      and they visited her only after<\/p>\n
about a year and there was no correspondence between the<\/p>\n
family.      It was only after the            delivery of Bindu that for<\/p>\n
the    first    time    this    witness      seems    to    have     visited   his<\/p>\n
daughter and son-in-law.            In his evidence he concedes “I was<\/p>\n
told that the accused had created trouble for not paying<\/p>\n
money but the in-laws and husband of Bindu did not speak to<\/p>\n
him directly in this regard.”                We are not much impressed by<\/p>\n
the evidence of this witness particularly because it does<\/p>\n
not    pin     point    that   it     was    only    because    of    the     cruel<\/p>\n
behaviour       on the part of the accused            that Bindu was driven<\/p>\n
to    commit    suicide.        Significantly        enough    in     his   cross-<\/p>\n
examination it was asked to him as to whether his son-in-law<\/p>\n
Prakasan used to take drinks and smoke                     ganja to which he<\/p>\n
replied that he did not know                whether Prakasan used to take
\ndrink or smoke ganja.       Silence of this witness and his not<\/p>\n
making any complaint to the police or anybody else put the<\/p>\n
question mark on the credibility of this witness.<\/p>\n
5.    The other evidence is that of PW1 Vijayan, who turned<\/p>\n
hostile.      However,     in   his    examination   in    Chief,     he<\/p>\n
significantly admits that on 15.6.1989 in the morning when<\/p>\n
he was in the house the accused came running and crying and<\/p>\n
told him that she heard some noise from the top of the house<\/p>\n
and she also stated that Bindu was not to be seen.                  This<\/p>\n
version would clearly go against the prosecution.           If the<\/p>\n
                                 -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
accused had strained relationship with the deceased, there<\/p>\n
was no reason to make a hue and cry about Bindu’s dis-<\/p>\n
appearance.     Moreover, she could not have any reason for<\/p>\n
crying before PW1. PW3, Satheeshan, who is the brother of<\/p>\n
Bindu deposed that 18 days prior to the incident when he had<\/p>\n
gone to the house of Bindu, she was crying.           On his asking<\/p>\n
repeatedly    he was told that she was beaten by her mother-<\/p>\n
in-law.\n<\/p>\n
          Ordinarily, we would have expected the witness to<\/p>\n
react and to complain atleast to his father.              However, his<\/p>\n
father also did not say anything          complaining against this<\/p>\n
beating incident.        This is apart from the fact that PW3<\/p>\n
also kept quiet and had not chosen to lodge any complaint<\/p>\n
with the police.    He admits that though he saw deceased with
\ninjury he did not tell this to any body.                                  That is very<\/p>\n
unnatural and should have been so realised by the courts<\/p>\n
below.       The other unnatural feature of the evidence of PW3<\/p>\n
is    that    he    never   talked       about    all    these       things       to    his<\/p>\n
brother       in    law,         Prakasan      which    would        be    a   relevant<\/p>\n
circumstance.\n<\/p>\n
6.           Insofar as the other evidence is concerned it is of<\/p>\n
PW4    Ameer       Jan     who    was    the    class-mate         of     Bindu.        Her<\/p>\n
evidence has been used for getting EX-P2 which is alleged to<\/p>\n
be a letter written by Bindu to her husband, as she claimed<\/p>\n
that she was conversant with the hand-writing of Bindu.                                 In<\/p>\n
her cross-examination, this witness admitted that Bindu had<\/p>\n
loved Prakasan very much and she was under the impression<\/p>\n
                                        -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
that     Prakasan was the person without bad habits and Bindu<\/p>\n
used to       hate people who had bad habits.                      She also admitted<\/p>\n
that after marriage Bindu had not told                         that Prakasan had<\/p>\n
bad habits and that her life with                    Prakasan was very happy.<\/p>\n
She also admitted that Bindu had the habit of becoming upset<\/p>\n
with    any     unusual     incident.          PW4     does    not      appear     to    be<\/p>\n
helping the prosecution excepting proving the                             letter which<\/p>\n
is EX P-2.         We will consider that letter a little later.<\/p>\n
7.        The      evidence      of     PW10   Thankam        is    the    only    other<\/p>\n
evidence of the relation of the deceased.                          She significantly
\nis the daughter of the appellant.                     She only proved the<\/p>\n
letter EX-P8 written by her to both Bindu and                          Prakasan.<\/p>\n
She admitted the contents of the letter. We will consider<\/p>\n
the letter a little later along with EX-P2. In her cross-<\/p>\n
examination PW10 admitted that Bindu had never told her that<\/p>\n
accused      assaulted her and she understood that the accused<\/p>\n
was very cordial with Bindu and Bindu was unhappy in the<\/p>\n
beginning as she had to leave her house.                   Significantly this<\/p>\n
witness was not declared hostile and therefore her version<\/p>\n
that the      relationship of the accused with Bindu was                      very<\/p>\n
cordial     goes unchallenged.         Considering the evidence of all<\/p>\n
these witnesses, it does not come out that Bindu committed<\/p>\n
suicide only and only because of the so-called ill-treatment<\/p>\n
by   the    mother-in-law.          What   was    that     ill-treatment,      how<\/p>\n
often she was ill-treated by the mother-in-law has remained<\/p>\n
                                       -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
mystery and has not been brought out in evidence of any of<\/p>\n
these witnesses.\n<\/p>\n
8.         Learned counsel then took us firstly to the EX-P2 on<\/p>\n
which the prosecution has relied heavily.                       This appears to<\/p>\n
be in the nature of suicide note or put it more correctly it<\/p>\n
happens     to   be    the   last   letter       written    by   Bindu   to   her<\/p>\n
husband.         The   following      contents      of     Ex    P-2   are    very<\/p>\n
relevant.\n<\/p>\n
       “My beloved    Prakasan, You need not worry, you should<\/p>\n
look after my child better. You have not done anything wrong<\/p>\n
but one thing is there, I asked you many times, shall I<\/p>\n
serve rice?     Shall I serve Tea? How many times, how many<\/p>\n
time I asked.    You have not even said yes or<\/p>\n
no to me.     If you do not like me, you can marry someone<\/p>\n
else, but you should look after after my child properly,<\/p>\n
that is enough.    You do not like me for the last many days.<\/p>\n
Now, I am not required.     I must get this.     I had been told<\/p>\n
everybody in the past that I should not go with him.          My<\/p>\n
parents had told me, that he may leave me after sometime.<\/p>\n
But, I did not obey their words and came on my own decision.<\/p>\n
Now, I am getting this gift.     I got my child, and now, I got<\/p>\n
a gift bigger than that.      Prakasan, you need not obey me,<\/p>\n
need not fear me, you can live whatever way you like.       When<\/p>\n
you came lat night, I would not disturb you by asking, where<\/p>\n
were you.     Now onwards, my disturbance would not be there.<\/p>\n
You are not able to do anything due to my existence.       So I<\/p>\n
leave according to my wishes.    Your mother is more horrible.<\/p>\n
                                -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
Whatever I do is wrong for her.       You should not given my<\/p>\n
child to her.     You can give my child to Thankamma sister    I<\/p>\n
know that she will look after my child properly.”<\/p>\n
       The only portion that we find in this letter against
\nthe accused is that the accused has been called                           a horrible<\/p>\n
lady and that she did not approve of anything done by the<\/p>\n
deceased.       The deceased had also written that the child<\/p>\n
should not be given             in the       custody of the accused.                 The<\/p>\n
letter      clearly      suggests       that        the       deceased    Bindu      was<\/p>\n
completely dis-illusioned about her husband with whom she<\/p>\n
had eloped much against the will of her parents and further<\/p>\n
that her husband did not take notice of her very existence<\/p>\n
and   did    not    bother      about       her     at    all.    Insofar     as     the<\/p>\n
reference to the accused is concerned, the reference is by<\/p>\n
way of the instruction to her husband that her child should<\/p>\n
not be      given   in    the    custody       of    the      accused    as   she   was<\/p>\n
horrible.      We do not think that this expression is such a<\/p>\n
strong      expression        that    the     courts          could   come    to     the<\/p>\n
conclusion     that      it     was   only        and     only    because     of     the<\/p>\n
behaviour and the treatment of the accused to the deceased<\/p>\n
that she was driven to commit suicide.                        This takes us to the<\/p>\n
other letter namely the EX-P8 which has been proved by its<\/p>\n
author.     When    we   see     that    letter          it    becomes   clear      that<\/p>\n
Prakasan, the husband of the deceased had become a drunkard.<\/p>\n
This is a letter written by a loving sister to her younger<\/p>\n
brother and his wife to mend their ways. She had advised her<\/p>\n
                                         -9-<\/span><\/p>\n
brother not to drink and not to start humiliating quarrels
\nand fighting.        True, it is stated to the effect that the<\/p>\n
mother should be comfortable and she should be made happy<\/p>\n
and the mother did not know how to talk and all of them had<\/p>\n
suffered the pain            because of the talks of their mother.<\/p>\n
However, the daughter is careful enough to write that it<\/p>\n
should not be taken seriously and nobody should feel about<\/p>\n
it, and being the mother she should be ignored. This witness<\/p>\n
has   written   in     the    letter   that    Amma   may   say    something<\/p>\n
without knowing consequence of the same. We do not think<\/p>\n
that this letter which has painted the accused with black<\/p>\n
brush is sufficient to hold that she was so bad and she ill-<\/p>\n
treated the deceased so much that the deceased was driven to<\/p>\n
commit suicide only because of these factors.<\/p>\n
9.      In the matter of offence under Section 306, IPC we<\/p>\n
would expect much stronger evidence than what is presented.<\/p>\n
True it is that the evidence about what happens within the<\/p>\n
four corners of walls is not available to the Investigating<\/p>\n
Agency. But in this case, very strangely, the Investigating<\/p>\n
Agency has not proceeded against the husband against whom<\/p>\n
there was a very strong suspicion.             The Investigating Agency<\/p>\n
has   instead   made    a     scapegoat   of   the    old   mother   perhaps<\/p>\n
trying to rely on the age old concept of bickerings between<\/p>\n
the   mother-in-law      and    daughter-in-law.       That   is     not   the<\/p>\n
universal truth.        The courts below should have therefore in<\/p>\n
such a matter appreciated the evidence with discerning eyes.
\n                                       -10-<\/span><\/p>\n
    The evidence should have been weighed with more care and the<\/p>\n
    finding should have been arrived at that for but such ill-<\/p>\n
    treatment    by   the   accused,   the     deceased   would   not   have<\/p>\n
    committed suicide.      Such would be the standard of proof in<\/p>\n
    the matter under Section 306, IPC.           It is indisputable true<\/p>\n
    that the court has to appreciate the evidence with open mind<\/p>\n
    and not being     driven by the age old concepts.        Applying all<\/p>\n
    these principles we find that the evidence falls short of<\/p>\n
    the required standard of proof.           We are, therefore, not in a<\/p>\n
    position to agree with the courts below in so far as their<\/p>\n
    findings are concerned.        In our opinion, the evidence in<\/p>\n
    this case fell miserably short of the required standard of<\/p>\n
    proof.   In that view we would allow the appeal and acquit<\/p>\n
    the accused.      The judgments of the courts below are set<\/p>\n
    aside and the accused is acquitted.              Her bail bonds are<\/p>\n
    cancelled.\n<\/p>\n
                                                 ……………….J.\n<\/p>\n
                                                 (V.S.SIRPURKAR)<\/p>\n
                                                ………………..J.\n<\/p>\n
                                                (DEEPAK VERMA)<\/p>\n
New Delhi,
\nOctober 8, 2009.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Mankamma vs State Of Kerala on 8 October, 2009 Author: V.S.Sirpurkar Bench: V.S. Sirpurkar, Deepak Verma REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1198 OF 2003 MANKAMMA … Appellant(s) Versus STATE OF KERALA … Respondent(s) J U D G M E N T V.S.SIRPURKAR, J. 1. […]<\/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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-103828","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nMankamma vs State Of Kerala on 8 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mankamma vs State Of Kerala on 8 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-10-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-07-24T03:48:47+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mankamma vs State Of Kerala on 8 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-24T03:48:47+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":2440,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009\",\"name\":\"Mankamma vs State Of Kerala on 8 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-24T03:48:47+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mankamma vs State Of Kerala on 8 October, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Mankamma vs State Of Kerala on 8 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mankamma vs State Of Kerala on 8 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-07-24T03:48:47+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mankamma vs State Of Kerala on 8 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-24T03:48:47+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009"},"wordCount":2440,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009","name":"Mankamma vs State Of Kerala on 8 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-24T03:48:47+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mankamma-vs-state-of-kerala-on-8-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mankamma vs State Of Kerala on 8 October, 2009"}]},{"@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\/103828","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=103828"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/103828\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=103828"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=103828"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=103828"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}