{"id":112282,"date":"2010-07-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010"},"modified":"2015-05-29T17:08:00","modified_gmt":"2015-05-29T11:38:00","slug":"state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010","title":{"rendered":"State vs Lakhamanbhai on 14 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
State vs Lakhamanbhai on 14 July, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: A.M.Kapadia,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice J.C.Upadhyaya,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   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\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.MA\/662\/2010\t 9\/ 9\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nMISC.APPLICATION No. 662 of 2010\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 133 of 2010\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT - Applicant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nLAKHAMANBHAI\nKUVARABHAI RAJPUT & 1 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\nAppearance : \nMR\nLB DABHI, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR\nfor Applicant(s) : 1, \nNone\nfor Respondent(s) : 1 -\n2. \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.M.KAPADIA\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 J.C.UPADHYAYA\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 14\/07\/2010 \n\n \n\nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n
(Per
\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA)<\/p>\n
By
\n\tmeans of filing this Application under Section 378 (1)(3) of the
\n\tCode of Criminal Procedure (“the Code” for short), the
\n\tApplicant – State of Gujarat has prayed to grant leave to file
\n\tCriminal Appeal No.133 of 2010, which is directed against the
\n\tjudgment and order dated 06.07.2009 rendered in Special Case No.129
\n\tof 2008 by the learned Presiding Officer & Additional Sessions
\n\tJudge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Disa, Camp at Diyodar,
\n\tacquitting the Respondent – accused (“the accused”
\n\tfor short) of the offences punishable under Sections 336, 427, 504
\n\tand  114 of the Indian Penal Code (“the Code for short”)
\n\tand Section 3(1)(X) of the Schedule Castes and Scheduled Tribes
\n\t(Prevention of Atrocities), Act 1989 (“the Atrocities Act”
\n\tfor short).\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tprosecution case as disclosed in the FIR and unfolded during trial
\n\twas that;\n<\/p>\n
2.1\tAltercation
\n\ttook place between the complainant Bhalabhai Kanjibhai Dalit and the
\n\taccused for sending someone to collect money and then the accused
\n\tused filthy language. Since complainant Bhalabhai Kanjibhai Dalit
\n\tasked for pardon, the accused got excited and started pelting stones
\n\tupon him and caused injury and, thereafter, threw the articles from
\n\tthe cabin and caused damage of the cabin of complainant Bhalabhai to
\n\tthe tune of Rs.500\/-. Complainant Bhalabhai reported the incident to
\n\tpolice and his FIR was registered. During the course of
\n\tinvestigation, statements of material witnesses were recorded,
\n\tnecessary panchamas came to be drawn by the Investigating Police
\n\tOfficer in presence of panchas. After collecting required material
\n\tfor the purpose of lodgment of chargesheet, chargesheet came to be
\n\tfiled in the Court of learned JMFC, Diyodar. Since the offence under
\n\tthe Atrocity Act is exclusively triable by the Special Court, the
\n\tlearned JMFC, Diyodar committed the case to the Special Court, Disa
\n\tcamp at Diyodar for trial.\n<\/p>\n
2.2\tLearned
\n\tJudge framed charge against the accused for the offences alleged
\n\tagainst them and the accused did not plead guilty and claimed to be
\n\ttried. Thereupon, the prosecution adduced oral and documentary
\n\tevidence. The prosecution examined 8 witnesses and relied upon 7
\n\tdocuments, detailed in paragraph 5 in the impugned judgment. After
\n\tthe prosecution concluded its oral evidence, the learned trial Judge
\n\trecorded further statements of the accused under Section 313 of the
\n\tCode. The accused in their further statements denied generally all
\n\tthe incriminating circumstances put to them by the trial Court and
\n\tstated that they have been falsely implicated in this case and
\n\tneither led any oral evidence nor examined any witness in support of
\n\ttheir defence.\n<\/p>\n
2.4\tAt
\n\tthe end of the trial, on appreciation, evaluation, analysis and
\n\tscrutiny of the evidence on record, the trial Court came to the
\n\tconclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge
\n\tlevelled against the accused and, therefore, complicity of the
\n\taccused was not established.  On
\n\tthe aforesaid finding, the trial Court acquitted the accused, giving
\n\trise to this Application seeking leave to file the Appeal.\n<\/p>\n
\tWe
\n\thave considered the submissions advanced by Mr. L.B.Dabhi, learned
\n\tAPP for the Applicant – State of Gujarat. We have perused the
\n\timpugned judgment and order and the set of evidence supplied by him
\n\tduring the course of his submission, as also the R & P of
\n\tSpecial Case No.129 of 2008 which we had called for by order dated
\n\t29.06.2010. This Court has also undertaken a complete and
\n\tcomprehensive appreciation of all vital features of the case and the
\n\tentire evidence on record with reference to broad and reasonable
\n\tprobabilities of the case.\n<\/p>\n
At
\n\tthe outset, it may be noted that according to the trial Court the
\n\tentire prosecution case centres round the evidence of complainant
\n\tBhalabhai Kanjibhai, examined at Exh.14. Appreciating the evidence
\n\tof the complainant, trial Court came to the conclusion that the
\n\tevidence was not such which would inspire confidence and there were
\n\tmaterial contradictions in his evidence, which would go to the root
\n\tof the prosecution case. According to the complainant, as soon as
\n\tthe accused came near his cabin, he ran away from the cabin, as some
\n\tverbal altercation took place. According to his evidence, Naga Prema
\n\tand Duda Aghra were present when the incident occurred. Prosecution
\n\thas examined only Naga Prema in this case and he was declared
\n\thostile witness and did not support the case of the prosecution,
\n\twhereas the prosecution did not examine second witness Duda Aghra.
\n\tAppreciating the evidence adduced by the prosecution on record, the
\n\ttrial Court further came to the conclusion that despite the fact
\n\tthat Naga Prema happens to be close relative of the complainant,
\n\tdespite this, he did not support the prosecution case. The perusal
\n\tof impugned judgment and order rendered by the trial Court and
\n\texamining the record of the case, it further transpires that it has
\n\tcome on evidence that there was enmity between the complainant and
\n\tthe accused on account of Gram Panchayat election. The trial Court
\n\tfurther noted that as admitted by the complainant in his evidence,
\n\tat the time when the accused allegedly caused damage in his cabin,
\n\the was not present. The star eyewitness Naga Prema did not support
\n\tthe case. No medical evidence is produced by the prosecution in
\n\tsupport of its case. At the outset, it may be noted that no
\n\tindependent eyewitness, who has seen the alleged incident of using
\n\tthe abusive language in public place by the accused against the
\n\tcomplainant, has been examined.\n<\/p>\n
In
\n\tthe above view of the matter, the trial Court, therefore, came to
\n\tthe conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond
\n\tany reasonable doubt against the accused and the accused deserve
\n\tbenefit of doubt. Thus, the prosecution has not been able to bring
\n\thome the charge levelled against the accused and the complicity of
\n\tthe accused for commission of the offence is not established and
\n\tthere is no evidence against the accused to connect them with the
\n\talleged crime.\n<\/p>\n
\tIn
\n\tview of the unsatisfactory evidence led by the prosecution, we are
\n\tof the considered opinion that no illegality or infirmity has been
\n\tcommitted by the trial Court in acquitting the accused of the
\n\toffences with which they were charged. We find ourselves in complete
\n\tagreement with the ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of
\n\tacquittal, as, in our view, no other conclusion was possible except
\n\tthe one reached by the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n
This
\n\tis an acquittal appeal. The principles which would govern and
\n\tregulate the hearing of appeal by the High Court against an order of
\n\tacquittal passed by the Trial Court have been very succinctly
\n\texplained by the Supreme Court in the matter of  AJIT SAVANT
\n\tMAJAGAVI VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA, reported in AIR 1997
\n\tp.3255.\n<\/p>\n
(a)
\n\tIn an appeal against an order of acquittal, the High Court possesses
\n\tall the powers, and nothing less than the powers it possesses while
\n\thearing an appeal against an order of conviction.\n<\/p>\n
(b)
\n\tThe High Court has the power to reconsider the whole issue,
\n\treappraise the evidence and come to its own conclusion and findings
\n\tin place of the findings recorded by trial court, if the said
\n\tfindings are against the weight of the evidence on record, or in
\n\tother words, perverse.\n<\/p>\n
(c)
\n\tBefore reversing the finding of acquittal, the High Court has to
\n\tconsider each ground on which the order of acquittal was based and
\n\tto record its own reasons for not accepting those grounds not
\n\tsubscribing to the view expressed by the trial Court that the
\n\taccused is entitled to acquittal.\n<\/p>\n
(d)
\n\tIn reversing the finding of acquittal, the High Court has to keep in
\n\tview the fact that the presumption of innocence is still available
\n\tin favour of the accused and the same stands fortified and
\n\tstrengthened by the order of acquittal passed in his favour by the
\n\ttrial Court.\n<\/p>\n
(e)
\n\tIf the High Court, on a fresh scrutiny and reappraised of the
\n\tevidence and other material on record, is of the opinion that there
\n\tis another view which can be reasonably taken, then the view which
\n\tfavours the accused should be adopted.\n<\/p>\n
(f)
\n\tThe High Court has also to keep in mind that the trial Court had the
\n\tadvantage of looking at the demeanour of witnesses and observing
\n\ttheir conduct in the Court, especially in the witness box.\n<\/p>\n
(g)
\n\tThe High Court has also to keep in mind that even at that stage, the
\n\taccused was entitled to benefit of doubt. The doubt should be such
\n\tas a reasonable person would honestly and conscientiously entertain
\n\tas to the guilt of the accused.\n<\/p>\n
In
\n\t ANOKH SINGH vs. STATE OF PUNJAB,<\/a> reported in AIR 1992
\n\tSC p.598, Supreme Court has held that in an appeal against
\n\tacquittal, the High Court should attach greater weight to
\n\tappreciation of evidence by the Trial Judge who had the occasion to
\n\twatch the demeanour of the witnesses.\n<\/p>\n
It
\n\tis a cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that in an
\n\tacquittal appeal if  other view is  possible then also appellate
\n\tCourt cannot substitute its own view by reversing the acquittal into
\n\t conviction, unless  the  findings  of  the trial Court are
\n\tperverse,  contrary to  the material on  record, palpably  wrong,
\n\tmanifestly erroneous or demonstrably unsustainable.  (See  Ramesh
\n\tBabulal Doshi  V. State of Gujarat<\/a> (1996) 9 SCC 225).  In the
\n\tinstant case, the learned APP has not been able  to  point out to us
\n\tas to how the findings recorded  by the trial Court are  perverse,
\n\tcontrary  to material on record, palpably wrong, manifestly
\n\terroneous  or demonstrably unsustainable.\n<\/p>\n
On
\n\toverall appreciation of evidence, this Court is  satisfied that
\n\tthere is no infirmity in the reasons assigned by the trial Court for
\n\tacquitting the accused.  Suffice it to say that the trial Court has
\n\tgiven cogent and convincing reasons for  acquitting the accused and
\n\tthe learned A.P.P. has  failed to dislodge the reasons given by the
\n\ttrial Court and convince this Court to take a view contrary to the
\n\tone taken by the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n
Seen
\n\t in  the  above  context, we do not find any valid reason or
\n\tjustifiable ground to interfere with the impugned  judgment
\n\tand order acquitting the accused of the offences with which they
\n\twere charged.\n<\/p>\n
For
\n\tthe foregoing reasons, the application fails and accordingly it is
\n\trejected.  Resultantly, leave to appeal is refused, and as a
\n\tconsequence thereof, Criminal Appeal No.133 of 2010 is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(A.M.\n<\/p>\n
Kapadia, J.)<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(J.C.Upadhyaya,
\nJ.)<\/p>\n
(binoy)<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court State vs Lakhamanbhai on 14 July, 2010 Author: A.M.Kapadia,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice J.C.Upadhyaya,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.MA\/662\/2010 9\/ 9 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 662 of 2010 In CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 133 of 2010 ========================================================= STATE OF GUJARAT – Applicant(s) Versus LAKHAMANBHAI KUVARABHAI […]<\/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-112282","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nState vs Lakhamanbhai on 14 July, 2010 - 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\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State vs Lakhamanbhai on 14 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-05-29T11:38:00+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State vs Lakhamanbhai on 14 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-29T11:38:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1729,\"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\\\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010\",\"name\":\"State vs Lakhamanbhai on 14 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-29T11:38:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State vs Lakhamanbhai on 14 July, 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":"State vs Lakhamanbhai on 14 July, 2010 - 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\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State vs Lakhamanbhai on 14 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-05-29T11:38:00+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State vs Lakhamanbhai on 14 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-29T11:38:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010"},"wordCount":1729,"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\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010","name":"State vs Lakhamanbhai on 14 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-29T11:38:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-lakhamanbhai-on-14-july-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State vs Lakhamanbhai on 14 July, 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\/112282","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=112282"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/112282\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=112282"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=112282"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=112282"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}