{"id":12394,"date":"2010-01-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010"},"modified":"2016-11-13T10:03:36","modified_gmt":"2016-11-13T04:33:36","slug":"gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010","title":{"rendered":"Gracy Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Gracy Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(Crl.).No. 541 of 2009(S)\n\n\n1. GRACY JOSEPH,AGED 42 YEARS,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR\/DIST.MAGISTRATE,\n\n3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,\n\n4. THE S.I.OF POLICE,KELAKAM POLICE\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN\n\n                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.Q.BARKATH ALI\n\n Dated :20\/01\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                             K. M. JOSEPH &\n                        P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JJ.\n               --------------------------------------------------\n                   W.P(CRL). NO. 541 OF 2009 S\n               ---------------------------------------------------\n                 Dated this the 20th January, 2010\n\n                               JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
K.M. Joseph, J.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
     Petitioner is the wife of Shri Pappachan @ Mathew who<\/p>\n
has been detained under the provisions of The Kerala Anti-<\/p>\n
Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to<\/p>\n
as the Act). Ext.P1 is the order dated 25.09.2009 passed by the<\/p>\n
District Magistrate ordering detention. There are five cases<\/p>\n
referred to in Ext.P1 order, which reads as follows:<\/p>\n
Sl.                   Date of\n      Offence                           Crime No.                Remarks\nNo                  occurrence\n  1 Sec. 55(a)    24\/02\/2006         36\/2006 of           300 ml. of Arrack\n                                     Kelakam P.S.         was\n                                                          seized by the fourth\n                                                          respondent\n  2 Sec. 55(a)    02\/05\/06           85\/2006 of           2.5 ltrs. of Arrack\n                                     Kelakam P.S.         seized near the house\n                                                          of the detenu by the\n                                                          fourth respondent\n  3 Sec. 55(a)(i) 14\/02\/2008         37\/2008 of           8.80    ltrs.  IMFL\n                                     Kelakam P.S.         seized from the house\n                                                          of the detenu by the\n                                                          fourth respondent\n\nWP(CRL).541\/09 S                2<\/span>\n\n\nSl.                 Date of\n       Offence                   Crime No.            Remarks\nNo                occurrence\n   4 Sec. 55(a)  10\/07\/08     153\/2008 of      15 bottles of IMFL\n                              Kelakam P.S.     each containing 1 ltr.\n                                               was abandoned by\n                                               the detenu on seeing\n                                               the police and run\n                                               away,    which  was\n                                               seized by the fourth\n                                               respondent\n   5 Sec. 55(a)  11\/06\/09     88\/2009 of       Seized    13  bottles\n                              Kelakam P.S.     of     IMFL     each\n                                               containing 375 ml.\n                                               near the premises of\n                                               Kottiyoor     temple,\n                                               seized by the fourth\n                                               respondent\n\n<\/pre>\n
      2. All the cases are under Section 55(a) (i) of the Kerala<\/p>\n
Abkari Act. They include cases of seizure of arrack and also<\/p>\n
cases of seizure of IMFL. All the cases are registered as Crimes<\/p>\n
of the Kelakam Police Station. The dates of occurrence of the<\/p>\n
cases are 24.02.2006, 02.05.2006, 14.02.2008, 10.07.2008 and<\/p>\n
11.06.2009. In the first case, the allegation is of seizure of 300<\/p>\n
ml. of arrack. In the second case, the quantity seized is 2.5<\/p>\n
litres of arrack.  In the third case, it is 8.80 litres of IMFL. In<\/p>\n
the fourth case, 15 bottles of IMFl each containing one litre<\/p>\n
were allegedly abandoned by the detenu on seeing the police.<\/p>\n
WP(CRL).541\/09 S                   3<\/span><\/p>\n
Still further, in the fifth case, the seizure alleged is of 13 bottles<\/p>\n
of IMFL each containing 375 ml. Ext.P1 order of detention has<\/p>\n
been approved by Ext.P4 under Section 3(3) of the Act. Ext.P6<\/p>\n
is the order passed by the Government on a representation given<\/p>\n
by the detenu.\n<\/p>\n
      3. We heard Shri C.P. Peethambaran, learned counsel for<\/p>\n
the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. Petitioner<\/p>\n
seeks a writ of habeas corpus to produce the detenu before this<\/p>\n
Court and to set him free.\n<\/p>\n
      4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the<\/p>\n
Act has been invoked against the detenu in a very casual<\/p>\n
manner. He would, in this regard, point out that in Ext.P3<\/p>\n
submitted by the Sub Inspector of Police, in respect of<\/p>\n
FIR.88\/09, the date of submission of the charge sheet was<\/p>\n
shown as 18.07.2009, but it is pointed out that Ext.P3 was<\/p>\n
submitted by the Sub Inspector of Police on 25.06.2009. He<\/p>\n
poses the question as to how, in a Report submitted on<\/p>\n
25.06.2009, the Sub Inspector of Police could have pointed out<\/p>\n
that date of submission of the charge sheet in the said case as<\/p>\n
WP(CRL).541\/09 S                4<\/span><\/p>\n
18.07.2009. Secondly, he would contend that in Ext.P1 the<\/p>\n
detaining Authority has stated as follows:<\/p>\n
            “12. The respondent is a habitual offender,<\/p>\n
     involved in many cases against the provisions of<\/p>\n
     Abkari Act.      The materials furnished by the<\/p>\n
     Superintendent of Police, Kannur reveals that he is<\/p>\n
     continuously involved in many such offences. His<\/p>\n
     last crime committed as per Crime No.88\/09 u\/s.55<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
     (a) of Abkari Act dated 11.06.09 reveals that he is<\/p>\n
     still involved in such activities.   As such, if he<\/p>\n
     remains at large, he would indulge in antisocial<\/p>\n
     activities, detrimental to the peace and traanquility<\/p>\n
     of the people residing in the Thottada and<\/p>\n
     suburabs.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
He would submit that Thottada and suburbs are situated far<\/p>\n
away. He would point out that this betrays non-application of<\/p>\n
mind. He would point out further that Ext.P4 is the order by<\/p>\n
which the Government has approved the order of detention<\/p>\n
under Section 3(3) of the Act. Ext.P5 is stated to be an order<\/p>\n
issued by the detaining Authority dated 07.10.2009. It reads as<\/p>\n
follows:\n<\/p>\n
WP(CRL).541\/09 S               5<\/span><\/p>\n
            “In the order of detention issued on 25.09.09<\/p>\n
      against Sri. Thekkedath Pappachan @ Mathew, S\/o.<\/p>\n
      Joseph,   Thekkedath    House,   Kottiyoor   amsom,<\/p>\n
      Kadappanam, Kelakam Police Station limit, in<\/p>\n
      `Annexure 2′ the following erratum is hereby<\/p>\n
      ordered.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            In 3rd page, para 12, last line to be read as<\/p>\n
      “people residing in Kelakam police station limit”.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            The papers read above stands corrected to the<\/p>\n
      above extent only.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that<\/p>\n
these documents would show that the detaining Authority has<\/p>\n
approached the issue in a most casual manner which warrants<\/p>\n
interference with the order passed by the Magistrate. He would<\/p>\n
submit that the order of approval (Ext.P4) is with reference to<\/p>\n
the contents of paragraph 12 of Ext.P1 which we have already<\/p>\n
extracted. Even if the erratum order was passed subsequently,<\/p>\n
there was no approval of the order of detention, with referrence<\/p>\n
to a change brought about in the order of detention by the<\/p>\n
issuance of the erratum order (Ext.P5), he contends. He further<\/p>\n
took us through Ext.P6 order rejecting the representation by the<\/p>\n
WP(CRL).541\/09 S                 6<\/span><\/p>\n
detenu. It is submitted that the order is dated 24.10.2009, but it<\/p>\n
refers to a representation dated 27.10.2009. He poses a question<\/p>\n
as to how such a mistake could have been made.               He<\/p>\n
further contended that there was no proper consideration of the<\/p>\n
representation. He would also contend that the detenu has been<\/p>\n
in jail for the past three months and having regard to the facts,<\/p>\n
this Court may direct his release.\n<\/p>\n
      6. Per contra, learned Government Pleader would point<\/p>\n
out that while it is true that Ext.P3 submitted by the Sub<\/p>\n
Inspector of Police is dated 25.06.2009 and at that stage the<\/p>\n
charge sheet had not been filed in FIR.88\/09. A perusal of<\/p>\n
Ext.P3 (at internal page 6 of Ext.P3) will show that the<\/p>\n
document was forwarded to the Superintendent of Police,<\/p>\n
Kannur by the Deputy Superintendent of Police only on<\/p>\n
29.7.2009. By that time, the case had been charge sheeted on<\/p>\n
18.7.2009. He would submit that, therefore, there is no basis at<\/p>\n
all for the petitioner’s complaint. Next, he would submit that<\/p>\n
there was a typographical error in Ext.P1 order in so far as<\/p>\n
WP(CRL).541\/09 S                7<\/span><\/p>\n
instead of stating Kelakam area, in paragraph 12 it was stated as<\/p>\n
Thottada and suburbs. He would submit that it was, therefore,<\/p>\n
upon the error being noticed, Ext.P5 Erratum was issued. He<\/p>\n
would also point out that the Erratum Order was also served on<\/p>\n
the detenu on 7.10.2009, as per the time prescribed in Section 7<\/p>\n
(2) of the Act. It is pointed out in this regard that though the<\/p>\n
order of detention was issued on 25.9.2009, the detenu was<\/p>\n
arrested only on 3.10.2009. These submissions are seen stated<\/p>\n
in the Counter Affidavit at paragraph 9. There is no Reply<\/p>\n
Affidavit as such in regard to these aspects, he points out. He<\/p>\n
would point out that by the time the approval order was passed,<\/p>\n
the erratum order had already been issued and there was no<\/p>\n
question of issuing further order approving the detention order<\/p>\n
with the correction carried out by the erratum order. He would<\/p>\n
also point out that the detaining Authority has carefully<\/p>\n
considered the matter as is evident from the narration of the<\/p>\n
facts in the order of detention and he would submit that the<\/p>\n
detenu is involved in many cases as noted in the order of<\/p>\n
WP(CRL).541\/09 S                  8<\/span><\/p>\n
detention.   He would further submit that the date of the<\/p>\n
representation mentioned in Ext.P6 order rejecting the<\/p>\n
representation is only a mistake.\n<\/p>\n
      7.   As far as the question relating to the statement<\/p>\n
contained in Ext.P3 to the effect that the case was charge-<\/p>\n
sheeted in respect of FIR No.88\/08 on 18.7.2009 which is an<\/p>\n
impossibility if the Report was given on 25.6.2009 by the Sub<\/p>\n
Inspector of Police, we see merit in the contention of the learned<\/p>\n
Government Pleader that it was actually forwarded to the office<\/p>\n
of the Superintendent of Police, Kannur only on 29.7.2009.<\/p>\n
There is no serious dispute that on 18.7.2009, the detenu was in<\/p>\n
fact charge-sheeted in the case. If that is so, the incorporation of<\/p>\n
the said fact in Ext.P3 cannot entitle the petitioner to challenge<\/p>\n
the order of detention.\n<\/p>\n
      8.   We also do not see any merit in the contention of the<\/p>\n
petitioner based on the contents of paragraph 12 of Ext.P1 order<\/p>\n
of detention. It is true that in the said paragraph, the Magistrate<\/p>\n
has referred to the wrong area. But, we cannot be oblivious to<\/p>\n
WP(CRL).541\/09 S                9<\/span><\/p>\n
the fact that in the Report submitted by the Authorities, the<\/p>\n
references are all to the Kelakam Police Station. Ext.P2 is<\/p>\n
apparently the information placed before the Magistrate by the<\/p>\n
Superintendent of Police. Therein, it is specifically stated that<\/p>\n
the involvement of the detenu brings him within the ambit of a<\/p>\n
known goonda as defined in Section 2(o) of the Act, as per the<\/p>\n
Explanation provided to the said Section. It is further stated that<\/p>\n
the Confidential Report reveals that he is a hard core criminal<\/p>\n
causing serious law and order problem and terrorizing people in<\/p>\n
Kelakam, Kannur by indulging in anti-social activities and he is<\/p>\n
causing serious headache to the police and to the public in the<\/p>\n
area by his criminal activities there, thereby threatening the<\/p>\n
peace and tranquility. Still further more, in Ext.P1 itself, as<\/p>\n
pointed out by the learned Government Pleader, reference is<\/p>\n
actually made to Kelakam in paragraph 11 of the Order. It is<\/p>\n
specifically stated that the detenu is a threat to the safety of<\/p>\n
public at Kelakam area. We further notice that, in fact, the<\/p>\n
Magistrate has also found that the detenu is not entitled to any of<\/p>\n
WP(CRL).541\/09 S                10<\/span><\/p>\n
the exemptions which are provided in the Act. Therefore, on a<\/p>\n
whole, we cannot find that there is merit in the contention of the<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the petitioner that the order is passed in a<\/p>\n
casual manner. It is true, there was a mistake occurred and<\/p>\n
apparently the mistake was corrected and the erratum order was<\/p>\n
also served on the detenu as provided in law. It is with Ext.P1<\/p>\n
order as modified by the order of erratum, that Ext.P4 has been<\/p>\n
passed, approving the detention, as the order of erratum is dated<\/p>\n
7.10.2009 and the order approving the detention is on<\/p>\n
12.10.2009. Therefore, there is no merit in the said contention<\/p>\n
of the petitioner also.      Petitioner has not produced the<\/p>\n
representation made by the detenu. We cannot describe the<\/p>\n
order of rejection of the representation as a one line order.<\/p>\n
There is no case for the petitioner, even before us, that any of<\/p>\n
the crimes which are alleged against the detenu are to be<\/p>\n
excluded for the purpose of considering whether he is a known<\/p>\n
goonda. There is no serious challenge to the objective<\/p>\n
satisfaction of the Magistrate that the detenu is a known goonda<\/p>\n
WP(CRL).541\/09 S                11<\/span><\/p>\n
by the alleged involvement of the detenu in the crimes stated in<\/p>\n
Ext.P1 order. In the circumstances of the case, we see no reason<\/p>\n
either to declare the detention illegal or to order release of the<\/p>\n
detenu.\n<\/p>\n
     The Writ Petition fails and it is dismissed.<\/p>\n
                                                     Sd\/=
\n                                                 K.M. JOSEPH,
\n                                                     JUDGE<\/p>\n
                                                    Sd\/=
\n                                            P.Q. BARKATH ALI,
\n                                                   JUDGE
\nkbk.\n<\/p>\n
                     \/\/ True Copy \/\/<\/p>\n
                                                  PS to Judge<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Gracy Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(Crl.).No. 541 of 2009(S) 1. GRACY JOSEPH,AGED 42 YEARS, … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY … Respondent 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR\/DIST.MAGISTRATE, 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, 4. THE S.I.OF POLICE,KELAKAM POLICE For […]<\/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-12394","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nGracy Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 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\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Gracy Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-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=\"2010-01-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-13T04:33:36+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\\\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Gracy Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-13T04:33:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1749,\"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\\\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010\",\"name\":\"Gracy Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-13T04:33:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Gracy Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 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":"Gracy Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 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\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Gracy Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-01-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-13T04:33:36+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\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Gracy Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2010","datePublished":"2010-01-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-13T04:33:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010"},"wordCount":1749,"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\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010","name":"Gracy Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-01-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-13T04:33:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gracy-joseph-vs-state-of-kerala-on-20-january-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Gracy Joseph vs State Of Kerala on 20 January, 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\/12394","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=12394"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12394\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12394"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12394"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12394"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}