{"id":110780,"date":"2011-10-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-10-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011"},"modified":"2017-10-08T11:21:59","modified_gmt":"2017-10-08T05:51:59","slug":"mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011","title":{"rendered":"Mohammed vs Unknown on 17 October, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Mohammed vs Unknown on 17 October, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Md Shah,<\/div>\n<pre>  \n Gujarat High Court Case Information System \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\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/474\/2010\t 9\/ 9\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. 474 of 2010\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE MD SHAH\n \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 be\n\t\t\treferred 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 \n\nMOHAMMED\nIMTIYAZ AHMEDMIYA MUNSHI - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance : \nMR\nMM TIRMIZI for\nAppellant(s) : 1, \nMr.L.R.Pujari, APP for Opponent(s) :\n1, \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 MD SHAH\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 17\/10\/2011 \n\n \n\n \nCAV\nJUDGMENT \n<\/pre>\n<p>\t\tBy<br \/>\nway of filing this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment<br \/>\nand order dated 20.1.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge,<br \/>\n(First Fast Track Judge), Ahmedabad (Rural), whereby the appellant<br \/>\nhas been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 306 and<br \/>\n366 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous<br \/>\nimprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs.5,000\/-, in default, to<br \/>\nundergo simple imprisonment for further three months for each of the<br \/>\noffences. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.<br \/>\nHowever, he was acquitted for the offence punishable under Section<br \/>\n363 of the Indian Penal Code.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tThe<br \/>\nbrief facts leading to filing of this appeal are such that<br \/>\ncomplainant Kataria Ramubhai Vishrambhai, resident of Barejdi, Taluka<br \/>\nDascroi filed a complaint before the Aslali Police on 28.7.1987 to<br \/>\nthe effect that he is serving in Sales Tax Department as Sales Tax<br \/>\nInspector at Ahmedabad and is residing with his family at Barejdi. He<br \/>\nhas two sons and four daughters. The eldest daughter&#8217;s name is<br \/>\nPallavi who was 19 years old at the time of the incident. It is<br \/>\nalleged in the complaint that the present appellant-accused kidnapped<br \/>\nhis daughter Pallaviben from the lawful custody of her parents on<br \/>\n28.7.1987 with ulterior motive of committing rape on her and that on<br \/>\n2.8.1987, it is reported that victim girl Pallaviben had died. On the<br \/>\nbasis of this complaint and after investigation, the charge sheet<br \/>\ncame to be filed in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Narol under<br \/>\nSections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned J.M.F.C.,<br \/>\nNarol committed the case to the Sessions Court wherein it was<br \/>\nnumbered as Sessions Case No.181 of 1989.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tThe<br \/>\nSessions Court framed the charges against the accused on 17.1.1990<br \/>\nunder Sections 363 and 366 of the Indian Penal Code. During the<br \/>\ncourse of the trial, on 6.3.1990, the complainant submitted<br \/>\napplication for further investigation which was granted by the<br \/>\nSessions Court by order dated 19.3.1990. After reinvestigation,<br \/>\nsupplementary charge sheet for the offence punishable under Section<br \/>\n306 of Indian Penal Code came to be filed against the accused on<br \/>\n31.5.1991 before the 4th Jt.J.M.F.C., Ahmedabad (Rural).<br \/>\nThe learned J.M.F.C. committed the said case to the Sessions Court<br \/>\nwhich was numbered as Sessions Case No.123 of 1991. As both the<br \/>\ncharge sheets were filed in reference to the same offence, learned<br \/>\nAPP submitted application on 15.12.2007 vide Exh.67 for consolidation<br \/>\nof both the sessions cases, which application was allowed by the<br \/>\nSessions Court and common evidence was recorded in both the cases.<br \/>\nDuring the pendency of the trial of Sessions Case No.123 of 1991, the<br \/>\naccused did not remain present and non-bailable warrant was issued<br \/>\nagainst him and he was arrested by the police on 2.7.2007. He filed<br \/>\nCriminal Miscellaneous Application No.11688 of 2008 before the High<br \/>\nCourt praying to release him on bail which was rejected on 11.9.2008.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tThe<br \/>\nlearned Sessions Judge framed the additional charge for the offence<br \/>\npunishable under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code against the<br \/>\naccused. The accused denied the charges framed against him and<br \/>\nclaimed to be tried.  To prove its case, the prosecution examined 19<br \/>\nwitnesses including the complainant. The prosecution also produced<br \/>\ndocumentary evidence including the complaint at Exh.95, inquest<br \/>\npanchanama at Exh.132, panchanama of scene of offence at Exh.133,<br \/>\nP.M.Note at Exh.111, FSL report, arrest panchanama of the accused at<br \/>\nExh.64, panchanama of recovery of the utensils from the alleged house<br \/>\nof the accused at Exh.117. After learned APP submitted the closing<br \/>\npursis, statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of<br \/>\nCriminal Procedure Code in which he stated that he is falsely<br \/>\nimplicated in the crime and he is innocent. After hearing the<br \/>\narguments advanced by learned advocates for both the sides, the trial<br \/>\nCourt convicted and sentenced the accused as referred to hereinabove,<br \/>\nagainst which the present appeal is filed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tHeard<br \/>\nlearned advocate Mr.Tirmizi for the appellant-accused and learned APP<br \/>\nMr.Pujari for the State, perused the record and impugned judgment and<br \/>\norder.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tLearned<br \/>\nadvocate Mr.Tirmizi for the appellant submitted that no offence is<br \/>\nmade out under Section 306 of Indian Penal Code as ingredients of<br \/>\nSection 107 of Indian Penal Code are not proved and in spite of that,<br \/>\nthe trial Court has, on assumptions and presumptions, came to the<br \/>\nconclusion that victim committed suicide as the accused did not marry<br \/>\nher though he promised to do so and therefore the accused instigated<br \/>\nthe victim to commit suicide. However, he fairly submitted that he<br \/>\ndoes not press this appeal on merits but presses only on the quantum<br \/>\nof sentence. He submits that the accused is married now and has<br \/>\nchildren of very young age and except this offence, the accused is<br \/>\nnot involved in any other offence and has not misused his liberty and<br \/>\ntherefore prayed to reduce the sentence.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tLearned<br \/>\nAPP Mr.Pujari submitted that the impugned judgment and order is just<br \/>\nand proper and is not required to be interfered with.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tThe<br \/>\npresent appellant-accused was charged under Sections 363 and 366 of<br \/>\nthe Indian Penal Code and subsequently charged under Section 306 of<br \/>\nIndian Penal Code. It is mainly the case of prosecution that the<br \/>\nvictim was in love affair with the accused and the accused kidnapped<br \/>\nthe victim by giving false promise of marriage and thereupon he<br \/>\nstayed with the victim girl in rented house at Naroda for some days<br \/>\nand after that the accused refused to marry her and so the victim was<br \/>\nnot in a position to return to her parents&#8217; house and committed<br \/>\nsuicide.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tIn<br \/>\nlight of this prosecution case, if we discuss the evidence on record,<br \/>\nP.W.2 Punamben Dahyabhai who is examined at Exh.13 stated in her<br \/>\ndeposition that she and deceased Pallavi went to school from Barejia<br \/>\nto Ahmedabad in train and one Rajubhai was also travelling in the<br \/>\nsaid train and there was love affair between the said Rajubhai and<br \/>\nPallavi. As per this evidence, deceased Pallavi also introduced this<br \/>\nwitness to the said Rajubhai. As per this evidence, said Rajubhai<br \/>\nwrote a chit to Pallavi stating her to leave the company of the<br \/>\naccused or else the accused would commit rape on her and spoil her<br \/>\nlife. This chit is referred to the witnesses and it was given Exh.11.<br \/>\nAs Pallavi moved around with the accused, this witness did not keep<br \/>\ncontact with Pallavi and then after six months, this incident took<br \/>\nplace. As per evidence of this witness, when police came for<br \/>\ninterrogation to her place, she came to know that deceased Pallavi<br \/>\nand accused were residing as husband and wife in Naroda and they got<br \/>\nmarried.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tP.W.3<br \/>\nRajendrabhai Prajapati stated in his deposition at Exh.14 that he was<br \/>\nin love affair with Pallavi and it continued for six months. As per<br \/>\nhis say, he cut the relation with Pallavi before three months from<br \/>\nthe date of the incident as he came to know the relation of Pallavi<br \/>\nwith the present accused. He also admitted the letter which he wrote<br \/>\nto Pallavi which is given Exh.11. As per evidence of this witness, he<br \/>\ncame to know that Pallavi got married with the accused and she was<br \/>\nresiding with accused at Naroda.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tP.W.5<br \/>\nShantaben Ambalal, in whose house the deceased and accused resided<br \/>\ntogether and from whose house the dead body of the deceased Pallavi<br \/>\nwas found, stated in her deposition at Exh.16 that both the accused<br \/>\nand Pallavi were tenants and they paid Rs.100\/- to her as monthly<br \/>\nrent. As per the evidence of this witness, they were residing<br \/>\ntogether and accused introduced Pallavi as his wife. From this<br \/>\nevidence, it transpires that accused and Pallavi got married and they<br \/>\nwere residing as husband and wife in the house of this witness. It<br \/>\nhas also come out from the evidence that accused purchased utensils<br \/>\nfor running the house and these utensils were found from the house of<br \/>\nthis witness and they contained the name of the accused. This also<br \/>\nshows that both the deceased and the accused were residing together<br \/>\nvoluntarily.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tAs<br \/>\nper the evidence of the father of the deceased victim-original<br \/>\ncomplainant Ramubhai Vishrambhai Kataria who is examined at Exh.85,<br \/>\nher daughter Pallavi-deceased was aged 19 years at the time of the<br \/>\nincident.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tAs<br \/>\nthe deceased was aged 19 years at the time of incident, no offence is<br \/>\nmade out under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code which is rightly<br \/>\nheld by the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tThe<br \/>\ntrial Court has come to the conclusion that as accused refused to<br \/>\nmarry the deceased, she committed suicide as she had no other<br \/>\nalternative but as per the evidence referred to hereinabove, the<br \/>\ndeceased and accused got married and were residing together as<br \/>\nhusband and wife. The Investigating Officer has not carried out any<br \/>\ninvestigation to find out whether the marriage took place between the<br \/>\naccused and deceased. The trial Court has only relied upon the<br \/>\nevidence of one witness Kiritbhai Hariprasad Pandya who was the<br \/>\nschool teacher who stated in his deposition at Exh.114 that the<br \/>\naccused came to him and confessed that he has committed mistake and<br \/>\nhe is staying with deceased without marriage as he is in love with<br \/>\nher. He confessed that the accused and the deceased are in love with<br \/>\neach other and therefore he ran away with her and they are staying at<br \/>\nNaroda. As per the evidence of this witness, he advised the accused<br \/>\nthat he committed this mistake at a very young age and therefore he<br \/>\nshould inform at his house immediately. Relying on this evidence, the<br \/>\ntrial Court came to the conclusion that accused stayed with Pallavi<br \/>\nwithout marriage and so presumption was drawn that he promised<br \/>\nmarriage to the deceased but as he did not fulfill the promise, the<br \/>\ndeceased was compelled to commit suicide.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tFrom<br \/>\nthe evidence of the witnesses, it transpires that both the accused<br \/>\nand deceased married with each other and were staying as husband and<br \/>\nwife and so in absence of any cogent and reliable evidence, it cannot<br \/>\nbe said that accused and deceased were staying at Naroda without<br \/>\ngetting married. Nothing has come out from the evidence which could<br \/>\nshow that any untoward incident had happened between the deceased and<br \/>\nthe accused before she committed suicide. As per evidence of<br \/>\nP.W.5-Shantaben who was the landlady, in the morning the accused was<br \/>\nin the house and then after she went to attend some religious<br \/>\nfunction (katha) and when she returned, she came to know that the<br \/>\ndead body of Pallavi is lying in her house and so she immediately<br \/>\ninformed the police. This witness did not state that any quarrel had<br \/>\ntaken place between the accused and deceased in the morning and she<br \/>\nalso stated that both of them were residing in the house happily.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tIn<br \/>\nview of the above, the ingredients of Section 107 of Indian Penal<br \/>\nCode are not proved and it cannot be said that the accused had<br \/>\ninstigated the victim to commit suicide by refusing to marry her. As<br \/>\nper the jail record, the accused is in jail since more than four<br \/>\nyears and his jail conduct is good. Considering the evidence on<br \/>\nrecord and considering the arguments advanced by learned advocate for<br \/>\nthe appellant, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice<br \/>\nwill meet if the sentence is reduced to the extent undergone.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tIn<br \/>\nview of the above, this appeal is partly allowed. The judgment and<br \/>\norder dated 20.1.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, (First<br \/>\nFast Track Judge), Ahmedabad (Rural) is hereby modified and the<br \/>\nsentence awarded is reduced to the extent already undergone. The<br \/>\naccused is ordered to be set at liberty, if not required in any other<br \/>\ncase.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(<br \/>\nM.D.Shah, J )<\/p>\n<p>srilatha<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Mohammed vs Unknown on 17 October, 2011 Author: Md Shah, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/474\/2010 9\/ 9 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 474 of 2010 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be [&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-110780","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>Mohammed vs Unknown on 17 October, 2011 - 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\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mohammed vs Unknown on 17 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-10-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-10-08T05:51:59+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mohammed vs Unknown on 17 October, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-10-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-08T05:51:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1952,\"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\\\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011\",\"name\":\"Mohammed vs Unknown on 17 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-10-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-08T05:51:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mohammed vs Unknown on 17 October, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Mohammed vs Unknown on 17 October, 2011 - 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\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mohammed vs Unknown on 17 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-10-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-10-08T05:51:59+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mohammed vs Unknown on 17 October, 2011","datePublished":"2011-10-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-08T05:51:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011"},"wordCount":1952,"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\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011","name":"Mohammed vs Unknown on 17 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-10-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-08T05:51:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohammed-vs-unknown-on-17-october-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mohammed vs Unknown on 17 October, 2011"}]},{"@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\/110780","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=110780"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/110780\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=110780"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=110780"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=110780"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}