{"id":121121,"date":"2008-09-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008"},"modified":"2015-09-11T02:06:52","modified_gmt":"2015-09-10T20:36:52","slug":"whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Whether vs State on 10 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Whether vs State on 10 September, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: K.A.Puj,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/3364\/2000\t 7\/ 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\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 3364 of 2000\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ\n\t\t\tSd\/- \n \n======================================\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n1.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nYES\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n2.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nTo\n\t\t\t\tbe referred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nNO\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n3.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nNO\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n4.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nNO\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n5.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nNO\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n======================================\n \n\nMAGANBHAI\nUKABHAI CHAVDA &amp; 7 - Petitioners\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT &amp; 4 - Respondents\n \n\n====================================== \nAppearance\n: \nMR NILESH A PANDYA for\nPetitioners. \nMR SP HASURKAR for Respondent(s) : 2, \nMR DIPEN\nDESAI, AGP for Respondent Nos. 3-4. \nDELETED for Respondent(s) :\n5, \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 K.A.PUJ\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 10\/09\/2008 \nORAL JUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>\tThe<br \/>\n\tpetitioners have filed this petition under Article 226 of the<br \/>\n\tConstitution of India praying for the direction to the respondent<br \/>\n\tNos.1 &amp; 2 to provide electric connection to the petitioners in<br \/>\n\ttheir agricultural field situated in village Bharad, Tal.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tDhangadhra, Dist. Surendranagar, as per their respective<br \/>\n\tapplication.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tOriginally,<br \/>\n\tthere were five petitioners.  Thereafter, Civil Application No. 3117<br \/>\n\tof 2000 was moved by one Mr. Harijan Pitambar Ganesh for joining<br \/>\n\tparty as petitioner in the present petition.  The said Civil<br \/>\n\tApplication was granted by this Court on 26.07.2000 and the said<br \/>\n\tapplicant was joined as petitioner No.6 in the above petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThis<br \/>\n\tCourt has passed detailed order on 19.09.2000 narrating the entire<br \/>\n\tfacts and issuing certain directions to the Gujarat Electricity<br \/>\n\tBoard.  The said interim order reads as under :-\n<\/p>\n<p>  2.\tIn  this  petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have prayed for directions to the Gujarat Electricity Board and the Executive Engineer of the said Board at Dhangadhra to release electricity connection to the  petitioners for their agricultural fields situate in village Bharad, Tal. Dhangadhra, Dist. Surendranagar under the scheme of reserving7.5% electricity connections in favour of the persons belonging to Scheduled Castes.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tThe petitioners&#8217; case is that they had applied for electric connection in 1999, but for want of electricity, the petitioners are not able to carry on their agricultural operations effectively. It is further submitted that similar applications were made by other persons belonging to Scheduled Castes in 1993 and 1994, but the electric connections were not released in their favour and, therefore, they had filed Special Civil Application No. 5198\/96 wherein several grievances  were made regarding indignities and the hardships which the members of harijan community were being made to suffer. This Court gave directions with respect to several issues such as supply of drinking water, providing employment, providing permanent means of livelihood, grievance about social boycott and also about release of electricity connections by the Gujarat Electricity Board. As far as electricity connection is concerned, the following direction was given :-\n<\/p>\n<p>Having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of  the present case which do not merely involve the question of supply of electricity as an amenity or even as a facility for enjoying one&#8217;s means of livelihood but the social fabric of the village is at stake in view of the rivalry between the two groups in the village on account of long pending dispute between the parties belonging to two communities, it appears to us to be just and proper to direct the Gujarat Electricity Board through its Executive Engineer, Dhangadhra to release electric connections for irrigation facilities to the  applicants  belonging  to  Harijan community from village Bharad who had applied  in  1993  or 1994, on their producing caste certificate in support of their respective applications. The Executive Engineer, Dhangadhra, shall release electric connection in favour of the applicants who had submitted their respective applications in 1993 and 1994 within one week from the date of receiving the caste certificate and the concerned applicant\/s complying with the formalities like payment of charges for such electric connection, to the Gujarat Electricity Board.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>4.    The learned counsel for the petitioners states that pursuant to the aforesaid direction,  the Gujarat Electricity Board has already released electric connections in favour of the persons belonging to harijan community who had applied in the year 1993-94 on their producing caste certificate in support of their respective applications.\n<\/p>\n<p>The learned counsel for the petitioners states that the agricultural fields of the petitioners, five in number, are very near the agricultural fields of  the harijans who are already supplied electric connection under the aforesaid order dated 22.1.1998 of this Court in Special Civil Application No.5198\/96.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\t\tIt is thus clear that the Gujarat Electricity had already installed the electricity poles at village Bharad for supplying the electric  connection to some of the farmers belonging to harijan community. No affidavit in reply is filed in the present petition. However, a reference is required to be made to the affidavit in reply  dated 15.1.1998  filed  by  J.S. Shah, Executive Engineer (REC), Gujarat Electricity Board at Dhangadhra in Special Civil Application No.5198\/96 pointing  out  that  they  have been  dealing  with  the applications for supply of electricity connection.  It is an  admitted  position  that there is a scheme for giving priority to the members of the Scheduled Caste to the extent  of  7.5% of the electricity connection being released.  Hence, in the instant case also similar directions are required to be given more  particularly when the electricity poles are already installed for supplying electricity to the persons who had applied for electricity connections under the reserved category in the year 1993-94.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\t\tThe respondents are accordingly directed to consider the petitioners&#8217; case in light of the aforesaid scheme for giving priority to the  members of the Scheduled Castes to the extent of 7.5% of the electricity connections being released, upon production of the certificates that the concerned petitioners belong to the Scheduled Castes and in accordance with their turn in the seniority list of Scheduled Caste candidates. This direction shall be complied with  as expeditiously as possible and preferably within one month from the date of receipt of the writ of this Court  or  a certified copy of this order, whichever is earlier. A  copy  of this order shall be made available to Mr. Hasurkar for the GEB.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAfter<br \/>\n\tissuing the aforesaid directions, the matter was kept on 19.10.2000.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t Pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 19.09.2000, an<br \/>\n\taffidavit is filed by one Mr. Jaswant C. Doshi, Executive Engineer,<br \/>\n\tGEB, Surendranagar Circle, Dhangadhra Division on 12.10.2000.  It is<br \/>\n\tstated in the said affidavit that GEB has evolved various Schemes to<br \/>\n\tfulfill the constitutional guarantee and one of the Schemes of the<br \/>\n\tBoard is to provide a specific 7.5% reservation to Schedule Caste \/<br \/>\n\tSchedule Tribe persons for giving priorities in agricultural<br \/>\n\tconnection. Separate registers are being maintained so as to see<br \/>\n\tthat no person is suffered.  It is further stated in the said<br \/>\n\taffidavit that the petitioners turn in their regular course has not<br \/>\n\tripen and even considering them as a person belonging to SC \/ ST,<br \/>\n\ttheir turn was not ripening.  It is further stated in the affidavit<br \/>\n\tthat under the procedure for applying 7.5% SC \/ ST scheme, the<br \/>\n\tapplicant has to pay Rs.100\/- towards registration charge for<br \/>\n\tavailing new agricultural connection and that special application<br \/>\n\tattaching certificate of the District Social Welfare Officer.  They<br \/>\n\tentered in 7.5% SC \/ ST scheme in appropriate sub-division and their<br \/>\n\tinward application are being maintained as per their date of<br \/>\n\tintimation.  The petitioners turn was also indicated in the said<br \/>\n\taffidavit and their respective numbers are at Sr. Nos. 185, 205,<br \/>\n\t276, 264 &amp; 214 respectively.  Since petitioner No.5 had not<br \/>\n\tapplied for 7.5% scheme, no number was given to him.  It is further<br \/>\n\tstated that on the date of the said affidavit i.e. 12.10.2000, under<br \/>\n\t7.5% SC \/ ST quota 139 Nos. were cleared against the registered<br \/>\n\tapplication of 283 from 31.08.1994 to 30.05.2000.  It is clearly<br \/>\n\tstated in the said affidavit that as and when their turn comes, they<br \/>\n\twill be given agricultural connection.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tFrom<br \/>\n\tthe interim order of this Court passed on 19.09.2000 and the<br \/>\n\taffidavit-in-reply filed on 12.10.2000, it appears that in October<br \/>\n\t2000, the petitioners&#8217; turn had not ripen and hence, they could not<br \/>\n\tbe given the electricity connection immediately.  Thus, this Court<br \/>\n\thas issued interim directions which are also to the effect that the<br \/>\n\trespondents should consider the petitioners&#8217; case in light of the<br \/>\n\taforesaid Scheme for giving priority to the members of the ST to the<br \/>\n\textent of 75% of the electricity connection being released, upon<br \/>\n\tproduction of the certificates that the concerned petitioners<br \/>\n\tbelonging to the SC and in accordance with their turn in the<br \/>\n\tseniority list of ST candidates.  Till October 2000, electric<br \/>\n\tconnections were given to the persons who stood upto Sr. No. 139.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tSince the petitioner&#8217;s turn in the seniority list was far behind,<br \/>\n\tthey might not have got the electricity connection immediately but<br \/>\n\tsince then 8 years have passed and by this time, all the petitioners<br \/>\n\tmust have got their electricity connections.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn<br \/>\n\tthe above view of the matter, there is all possibility that the<br \/>\n\tpetition may not survive in view of the interim directions given by<br \/>\n\tthe Court and in view of the affidavit-in-reply filed by the<br \/>\n\trespondent.  The petition has, therefore, become infructuous.  It is<br \/>\n\taccordingly disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioners to<br \/>\n\tapproach this Court in case of difficulty.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tSubject<br \/>\n\tto the aforesaid observation, this petition is accordingly disposed<br \/>\n\tof.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tSd\/-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[K.\n<\/p>\n<p>A. PUJ, J.]\t\t<\/p>\n<p>Savariya<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Whether vs State on 10 September, 2008 Author: K.A.Puj,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/3364\/2000 7\/ 9 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3364 of 2000 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ Sd\/- ====================================== 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-121121","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>Whether vs State on 10 September, 2008 - 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\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Whether vs State on 10 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-09-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-09-10T20:36:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Whether vs State on 10 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-10T20:36:52+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1414,\"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\\\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Whether vs State on 10 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-10T20:36:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Whether vs State on 10 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Whether vs State on 10 September, 2008 - 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\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Whether vs State on 10 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-09-10T20:36:52+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Whether vs State on 10 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-10T20:36:52+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008"},"wordCount":1414,"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\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008","name":"Whether vs State on 10 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-10T20:36:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-10-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Whether vs State on 10 September, 2008"}]},{"@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\/121121","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=121121"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/121121\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=121121"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=121121"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=121121"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}