{"id":114796,"date":"2007-08-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-08-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007"},"modified":"2016-04-05T16:25:21","modified_gmt":"2016-04-05T10:55:21","slug":"c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007","title":{"rendered":"C. Muhammed Iqbal vs State – Represented By Public … on 2 August, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
C. Muhammed Iqbal vs State – Represented By Public … on 2 August, 2007<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nBail Appl No. 4402 of 2007()\n\n\n1. C. MUHAMMED IQBAL, AGED 45 YEARS,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE - REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.SASINDRAN\n\n                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT\n\n Dated :02\/08\/2007\n\n O R D E R\n\n\n\n\n\n\n                              R. BASANT, J.\n\n               -------------------------------------------------\n\n                         B.A. No. 4402 OF  2007\n\n               -------------------------------------------------\n\n              Dated this the  2nd  day of August, 2007\n\n\n\n                                   ORDER\n<\/pre>\n
      Whoever   you   be   –   Judge,   Prosecutor,   Counsel,   Police<\/p>\n
Official   or   an   ordinary   lay   citizen;   if   after   going   through   the<\/p>\n
Case Diary in this case, your sense of justice and righteousness<\/p>\n
is not hurt  or wounded, there  must  be  something structurally<\/p>\n
defective and deficient in you.     The crime alleged in this case<\/p>\n
and the sequence of events that followed are truly disturbing.<\/p>\n
Your pride of being a citizen in this Republic  wedded to rule of<\/p>\n
law   would   be   pricked.       Any   civilized     society   must   hang   its<\/p>\n
head down in shame that such events can take place  within it<\/p>\n
anywhere.       It   would   be   abdication   of   responsibility   for   this<\/p>\n
Court to pretend not to have  seen the sorry state of affairs  in<\/p>\n
this  Case Diary and proceed to dispose of the anticipatory bail<\/p>\n
application   wearing     blinkers.       Observations   must   be   made<\/p>\n
about   the   gross   injustice   in   the   hope   that   such   observations<\/p>\n
 B.A. No. 4402 OF  2007                   -: 2 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
will improve the quality of criminal justice delivery system  in the<\/p>\n
State and ignoring  the apprehension that  the observations may<\/p>\n
trigger sensational commercial journalism and provide fodder for<\/p>\n
political fencing.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       2.  The events took place not  in any corner of the State; but<\/p>\n
in the heart of Talassery Town which has a place of prominence<\/p>\n
in   the   judicial   map   of   this   country   –   that   too   at     the   busy   O.V.<\/p>\n
Road.     There   is   a   row   of   shops   lying   east   to   west   abutting   the<\/p>\n
main road.     The victim in this case runs a petty shop – a textile<\/p>\n
and   tailoring   shop     –   in   the   middle   room,   having   taken   the<\/p>\n
premises on lease on a monthly rent of Rs.3,100\/- as per a lease<\/p>\n
deed dated 1\/4\/04 in the name of his wife.     One Musthafa and<\/p>\n
Mohammed   Kunhi     are   said   to   be   the   joint   owners   of   the   said<\/p>\n
shop room.    The petitioner herein is arrayed as the 4th accused.<\/p>\n
He   is     Mohammed   Iqbal,     the   Power-of-Attorney   holder   of   the<\/p>\n
said Mohammed Kunhi.    The rooms on the east and west of the<\/p>\n
victim’s shop as also the area behind  have all been sold.   There<\/p>\n
were requests to the victim to surrender  his premises.     He did<\/p>\n
 B.A. No. 4402 OF  2007               -: 3 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
not yield to those requests.   Such requests were allegedly made<\/p>\n
by accused 1 to 4 whose names are narrated in the F.I.R.       On<\/p>\n
the   night   of   7\/4\/07,   the   victim   had   closed   the   shop   and<\/p>\n
proceeded   to   his   house   in   peace.       The   next   morning   he   was<\/p>\n
informed that his shop room as well as the adjacent shop rooms<\/p>\n
have   all   been   razed   down   brutally   employing     JCBs   and   other<\/p>\n
vehicles.   The tenant – victim who thought that law will take care<\/p>\n
of them and  will not be forcibly thrown out of possession,  came<\/p>\n
on the next morning to see his shop room razed down and all the<\/p>\n
articles either destroyed   or removed stealthily.     He ran to the<\/p>\n
police station in the hope that he will get justice from the police.<\/p>\n
An   F.I.R.   was   registered.     The   four   persons,   who   had   allegedly<\/p>\n
wanted   the   victim  to   surrender   his   shop,   were   naturally  shown<\/p>\n
as the  suspected accused persons who  must have  had a role  in<\/p>\n
razing down his shop room.   The investigation slowly proceeded.<\/p>\n
The persons in the locality were questioned by the police.     The<\/p>\n
adjacent   shop   owner   stated   to   the   police   that   the   four   accused<\/p>\n
persons had come on the previous night to him and had insisted<\/p>\n
 B.A. No. 4402 OF  2007                 -: 4 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
that   he   must     vacate   the   premises   after   taking   away   all   his<\/p>\n
articles on the same night.     He complied with the said request.<\/p>\n
As he was proceeding to leave his shop in the late hours, he had<\/p>\n
seen the JCB and all the paraphernalia kept ready for operation<\/p>\n
with the four accused persons present there.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       3.       The   4th  accused   –   the   petitioner   herein   came   to   this<\/p>\n
Court claiming anticipatory bail. On his own showing he is a very<\/p>\n
influential person of the locality.    There are indications to show<\/p>\n
that he enjoys affluence also.     He prayed that anticipatory bail<\/p>\n
may be granted to him.     The incident took place in the night of<\/p>\n
7\/4\/07   and   the   petitioner   had   come   to   this   Court   as   late   as   on<\/p>\n
12\/7\/07.    He was not arrested till then.   He raised a contention<\/p>\n
before me when the matter came up for hearing that he is only a<\/p>\n
suspect;  that the suspicion is unjustified and that he is not liable<\/p>\n
to be arrested.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       4.     The   learned   Public   Prosecutor   was  requested   to   place<\/p>\n
the Case Diary   for the perusal of this Court.     A perusal of the<\/p>\n
Case   Diary   shows   that   one   Koduvally   Rajan   in   a   petition   dated<\/p>\n
 B.A. No. 4402 OF  2007                 -: 5 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
9\/4\/07 had admitted before the Investigating Officer  that he is<\/p>\n
the   one   responsible   for   demolition   of   the   building.     He   had<\/p>\n
marked   copies   of   the   petition   to   all   the   higher   officials   of   the<\/p>\n
police in the District.   Very interestingly, he raised a contention<\/p>\n
that the victim had no rights at all and the victim was trying to<\/p>\n
get back into   possession of the premises which admittedly was<\/p>\n
razed down by him.       A perusal of the Case Diary revealed that<\/p>\n
the   said   Koduvally   Rajan   had   not   been   arrayed   as   an   accused<\/p>\n
notwithstanding  his  bold  assertion  that  he  was   responsible  for<\/p>\n
the demolition of the building.     This Court was disturbed.     The<\/p>\n
learned Public Prosecutor was directed to take instructions and<\/p>\n
explain.        Thereafter,   the   learned   Director   General   of<\/p>\n
Prosecutions   has   appeared   on   behalf   of   the   police   before   me.<\/p>\n
Ordinary prudence is expected  from all human beings.    If such<\/p>\n
a demolition did take place, any prudent person must suspect the<\/p>\n
owner for having carried the mission.    If he did not so suspect,<\/p>\n
there is something certainly suspicions in his prudence.  But the<\/p>\n
Investigating Officer   does not appear to have considered that<\/p>\n
 B.A. No. 4402 OF  2007                  -: 6 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
possibility at all.     The Case Diary was placed before this Court<\/p>\n
on   20\/7\/07.       Koduvally   Rajan   was   not   made   an   accused.     No<\/p>\n
efforts   were   made   to   bring   him   on   the   array   of   accused   or   to<\/p>\n
make enquiries about him till then.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       5.   The learned Public Prosecutor and learned D.G.P. were<\/p>\n
requested   to   keep   the   Case   Diary   in   their   safe   custody.       The<\/p>\n
Investigating Officer was given an opportunity to explain.   He<\/p>\n
has now filed a statement.     The Case Diary now shows that the<\/p>\n
electrical energy connection to the premises was switched off on<\/p>\n
the night in question to facilitate the demolition.    Now it is said<\/p>\n
that a conspiracy was hatched to carry out the evil mission.   It is<\/p>\n
now   stated   that   Koduvally   Rajan   has   been   apprehended   and<\/p>\n
produced   before   Court   on   25\/7\/07     after   this   Court   made<\/p>\n
observations on 24\/7\/07 and gave the  Investigating Officer  an<\/p>\n
opportunity   to   explain.       The   Case   Diary   shows   that   the   local<\/p>\n
people were outraged  by the culpable conduct of the offenders.<\/p>\n
It   also   indicates   that   the   local   people   suspected     foul   play.       A<\/p>\n
harthal was organised by the Merchants’ Association.  Obviously<\/p>\n
 B.A. No. 4402 OF  2007               -: 7 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
the sentiments of the right thinking members of the community<\/p>\n
were hurt and disturbed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      6.       The  Investigating   Officer  now   tries   to   explain   that<\/p>\n
Koduvally   Rajan’s   address   in   the   petition   received   by   him   was<\/p>\n
not correct.     It was not handed over to him personally.     It was<\/p>\n
received  by post.     Though  it is seen that copies are marked to<\/p>\n
the   superior   officers,   copies   were   not   really   sent.       The<\/p>\n
Investigating   Officer  could   not   ascertain   the     identity   of   that<\/p>\n
person.   That is why he was not arrayed as an accused and was<\/p>\n
not   proceeded   against   till   this   Court   made   observations   on<\/p>\n
24\/7\/07.       One   cannot   be   too   naove   and   gullible   to   meekly<\/p>\n
swallow these excuses.     If ordinary prudence is employed, it is<\/p>\n
not   difficult   to   see   that   the   demolition   was   carried   out   after<\/p>\n
prior   concert   and   elaborate   preparation   and   with   the   blessings<\/p>\n
or at least  the willingness  to close their eyes  of the the powers<\/p>\n
that be to the injustice that was perpetrated.    The investigation<\/p>\n
is most unsatisfactory.     It is difficult to restrain oneself and not<\/p>\n
draw the inference that the entire operation had the blessings of<\/p>\n
 B.A. No. 4402 OF  2007                  -: 8 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
the powers that be.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       7.   Police is the visible arm of the State.   Good governance<\/p>\n
cannot   take   place   unless   we   have   an   efficient,   sincere,     honest<\/p>\n
and   committed   police   force.       The   police   force   in   the   country<\/p>\n
must   also   have   commitment   to   the   fundamental   values   of   the<\/p>\n
Constitution.       Concern   for   the   weak,   the   underprivileged,   the<\/p>\n
less fortunate and the victims of crimes must be inherent in the<\/p>\n
police force.    That is the  sum  and  substance  of the  preambular<\/p>\n
commitment   in   the   Constitution.     In   a   socialist   democratic<\/p>\n
republic if the   arms of the State do not have such fundamental<\/p>\n
commitment  to  the  weak and  underprivileged,   the  ideals   of the<\/p>\n
Constitution can never be achieved.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       8.     Idealism   by   itself   will   not   be   sufficient.     It   must   be<\/p>\n
matched with efficient and effective systems.         It has been the<\/p>\n
misfortune   to   this   Court,   sitting   in   this   jurisdiction,   to   see   the<\/p>\n
very   low   quality   of   investigation     in   crimes   in   this   State.       The<\/p>\n
police   force   has   to   become   professional.       Every   police   officer<\/p>\n
must have pride in the  discharge of his duty.   That is  crucially<\/p>\n
 B.A. No. 4402 OF  2007                -: 9 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
lacking   today,   it   appears.       Efforts   to   make   the   police   a<\/p>\n
committed   professional   force   have   not   been   seriously<\/p>\n
undertaken.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      9.       The   learned   D.G.P.   submits   that   the   needful   shall   be<\/p>\n
done and proper and effective investigation shall be conducted in<\/p>\n
the case.    In one case where this Court happens to see the Case<\/p>\n
Diary   and   expresses   its   dissatisfaction,   such   an   offer   is   made.<\/p>\n
But that is not sufficient at all.   It must be for the police force to<\/p>\n
ensure that ongoing supervision of     investigationa is conducted<\/p>\n
by the   superior officials.  In each Zone and in each sub-division<\/p>\n
there must be a group of senior police officials who will  monitor<\/p>\n
and   supervise   the   investigation   in   the   crimes.   Every<\/p>\n
Investigating Officer  must feel that his work will be supervised<\/p>\n
and it will be  suicidal professionally if he does not act efficiently.<\/p>\n
      10.   I leave it there.  It is for the  learned Director General<\/p>\n
of Prosecutions and the top  brass of the police to take necessary<\/p>\n
steps,   of   course,     with   the  active   support   and  assistance   of   the<\/p>\n
political   executive   to   ensure   that   the   quality   of   investigation   is<\/p>\n
 B.A. No. 4402 OF  2007              -: 10 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
considerably   improved   and   that   those   responsible   for   such<\/p>\n
collusive investigations are brought to book.<\/p>\n
      11.       Coming   back   to   the   prayer   of   the   4th  accused   for<\/p>\n
anticipatory bail, he claims to be the Power-of-Attorney holder of<\/p>\n
one  of the two joint owners of the property.   The learned D.G.P.<\/p>\n
submits that Koduvally Rajan does not appear to be an important<\/p>\n
player in the crime that has been committed.     He, the  learned<\/p>\n
D.G.P. feels, is only a pawn in the hands of the criminals whom<\/p>\n
the   learned   D.G.P.   describes   as   the   `Real   estate   Mafia’.     The<\/p>\n
petition is significantly silent that his principal has lost interest<\/p>\n
in the property and has already assigned the property to the said<\/p>\n
Koduvally   Rajan.       That   shows   that  at   least,   the   learned   D.G.P.<\/p>\n
has correctly understood   that the machinations were not of the<\/p>\n
persons   who   are   the     apparent   title   holders.       The   petitioner<\/p>\n
certainly   appears  to be  an  important  player  in  the  scheme  that<\/p>\n
was implemented.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      12.   There is indication to show that the petitioner was one<\/p>\n
of those who wanted the tenant to vacate.     There is material to<\/p>\n
 B.A. No. 4402 OF  2007                  -: 11 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
show that on the previous night the petitioner had gone to one of<\/p>\n
the   adjacent   owners   and   had   wanted   the   occupant   to<\/p>\n
immediately  vacate the premises.     There are indications in  the<\/p>\n
Case   Diary     to   show   that   the   petitioner   was   present   in   the<\/p>\n
locality late that night.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       13.     The jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail is certainly<\/p>\n
not to be invoked as a matter of course.   It must be reserved for<\/p>\n
extraordinary   situations   where   the   court   is   satisfied   that   the<\/p>\n
powers of arrest are about to be misused or abused.   I do not in<\/p>\n
this   case   find   any   such   features   which   would   justify   the<\/p>\n
invocation   of   the     extraordinary   equitable   discretion   under<\/p>\n
Sec.438   of   the     Cr.P.C.       This   certainly   is   a   fit   case   where   the<\/p>\n
petitioner  must appear  before  the  Investigating   Officer  or the<\/p>\n
learned   Magistrate   having   jurisdiction   and   seek   regular   bail   in<\/p>\n
the ordinary course.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       14.     I   expect   the   State   to   take   necessary   steps   to   ensure<\/p>\n
that   the   investigation   is   entrusted   to   the   officers   of   highest<\/p>\n
integrity and competence.    Necessary action in this regard shall<\/p>\n
 B.A. No. 4402 OF  2007           -: 12 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
be taken within a period of 15 days from this date and the action<\/p>\n
taken shall be reported to this Court.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      15.   This bail application is accordingly dismissed.<\/p>\n
      16.  Hand over a copy of this order to the learned  Director<\/p>\n
General of Prosecutions.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      17.  Call on 20\/8\/2007 for report of the learned D.G.P.<\/p>\n
                                                               Sd\/-\n<\/p>\n
                                                   (R. BASANT, JUDGE)<\/p>\n
Nan\/<\/p>\n
                 \/\/true copy\/\/<\/p>\n
                                              P.S. to Judge<\/p>\n
 B.A. No. 4402 OF  2007    -: 13 :-<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court C. Muhammed Iqbal vs State – Represented By Public … on 2 August, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Bail Appl No. 4402 of 2007() 1. C. MUHAMMED IQBAL, AGED 45 YEARS, … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE – REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR … Respondent 2. THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-114796","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nC. Muhammed Iqbal vs State - Represented By Public ... on 2 August, 2007 - 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\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"C. Muhammed Iqbal vs State - Represented By Public ... on 2 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-04-05T10:55:21+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=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"C. Muhammed Iqbal vs State – Represented By Public … on 2 August, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-05T10:55:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007\"},\"wordCount\":2158,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007\",\"name\":\"C. Muhammed Iqbal vs State - Represented By Public ... on 2 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-05T10:55:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"C. Muhammed Iqbal vs State – Represented By Public … on 2 August, 2007\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"C. Muhammed Iqbal vs State - Represented By Public ... on 2 August, 2007 - 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\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"C. Muhammed Iqbal vs State - Represented By Public ... on 2 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-04-05T10:55:21+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":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"C. Muhammed Iqbal vs State – Represented By Public … on 2 August, 2007","datePublished":"2007-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-05T10:55:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007"},"wordCount":2158,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007","name":"C. Muhammed Iqbal vs State - Represented By Public ... on 2 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-05T10:55:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-muhammed-iqbal-vs-state-represented-by-public-on-2-august-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"C. Muhammed Iqbal vs State – Represented By Public … on 2 August, 2007"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/114796","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=114796"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/114796\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=114796"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=114796"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=114796"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}