{"id":125866,"date":"2011-10-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-10-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011"},"modified":"2015-06-21T17:09:39","modified_gmt":"2015-06-21T11:39:39","slug":"shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011","title":{"rendered":"Shantilal vs State on 14 October, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Shantilal vs State on 14 October, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Z.K.Saiyed,<\/div>\n<pre>  \n Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n    \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/14608\/2011\t 8\/ 8\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. 14608 of 2011\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nCIVIL\nAPPLICATION No. 10699 of 2011\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 14608 of 2011\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nSHANTILAL\nPREMJIBHAI KOLI PATEL - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT THRO THE ADDL.CHIEF SECRETARY &amp; 3 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nBM MANGUKIYA for\nPetitioner(s) : 1,MS BELA A PRAJAPATI for Petitioner(s) : 1, \nMR KP\nRAVAL, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent(s) : 1, \nNOTICE\nSERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 2 -\n4. \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 14\/10\/2011 \nORAL JUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tpetitioner has filed this petition, under Article 226 of the<br \/>\n\tConstitution of India, challenging the proposed order of detention<br \/>\n\tdated 8.10.2011, which is alleged to have been passed by the<br \/>\n\tDistrict Magistrate, Ahmedabad, in exercise of provisions of Section<br \/>\n\t3 of the Prevention of Antisocial Activities Act, 1985 (for short<br \/>\n\t&#8220;PASA&#8221;), with a view to preventing him from acting in<br \/>\n\tany manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order by<br \/>\n\tDistrict Magistrate, branding him to be &#8220;Dangerous person&#8221;,<br \/>\n\tas defined under Section 2(c) of PASA.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe case of the<br \/>\n\tpetitioner is that the detention order is passed by the District<br \/>\n\tMagistrate, Ahmedabad dated 8.10.2011 against the petitioner<br \/>\n\tdirecting to detain him as &#8220;Dangerous person&#8221;. That FIR<br \/>\n\twas lodged against the petitioner on 29.7.2009 for the offences<br \/>\n\tpunishable under Sections 332, 504, 323, 506(2) and 114 of the IPC<br \/>\n\tand under Section 3(1) and (10) of Prevention of Atrocity (Scheduled<br \/>\n\tCaste and Scheduled Tribe) Act, 1989 by one Manilal Nathalal Chavda<br \/>\n\twith Viramgam Rural Police Station being CR No.41 of 2009. In the<br \/>\n\tsaid case the petitioner has been acquitted by the learned Special<br \/>\n\tJudge, Viramgam by judgment and order dated 22.10.2010. Some other<br \/>\n\toffences were also registered against the petitioner. That an FIR<br \/>\n\tbeing CR No.I-14 of 2011 was lodged against the petitioner by one<br \/>\n\tDilipbhai Babubhai Ramoliya with Viramgam Rural Police Station on<br \/>\n\t12.2.2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467,<br \/>\n\t468, 571 and 114 of the IPC. The dispute disclosed in the said FIR<br \/>\n\twas settled in the year 2009 wherein money was in fact not received<br \/>\n\tby the petitioner as set out in the body of the FIR. In the said<br \/>\n\tsettlement one Anwar Habiyani was the culprit in the entire<br \/>\n\tincident. Four cheques were given in pursuance of the said<br \/>\n\tsettlement. The first informant misused the said cheques and filed<br \/>\n\tcomplaint under Section 138 of the N.I.Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tHeard learned advocate<br \/>\n\tMr.B.M.Mangukiya appearing on behalf of the petitioner &#8211;<br \/>\n\tdetenue and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.K.P.Ravel,<br \/>\n\tappearing on behalf of the respondent &#8211; State. I have also<br \/>\n\tperused the papers produced before me.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLearned advocate for the<br \/>\n\tpetitioner submitted that the offences against the petitioner are in<br \/>\n\trelation to property dispute which is within the realm of personal<br \/>\n\tdispute between the parties. No allegations can be made against the<br \/>\n\tpetitioner in respect of disturbance of law and order, much less<br \/>\n\tpublic order. The petitioner having not indulged in any disturbance<br \/>\n\tof public order, there is no reason or occasion for exercise of<br \/>\n\tpowers under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the PASA Act for<br \/>\n\tordering preventive detention of the petitioner. It is, therefore,<br \/>\n\tsubmitted that detention order passed by the District Magistrate,<br \/>\n\tAhmedabad &#8211; respondent No.2 is ex-facie illegal and,<br \/>\n\ttherefore, the same requires to be quashed and set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tOn the other hand,<br \/>\n\tlearned AGP Mr. K.P.Raval has vehemently contended that the<br \/>\n\tpetitioner is the habitual offender and, therefore, no leniency is<br \/>\n\trequired to be shown against the petitioner. He has contended that<br \/>\n\tearlier also criminal cases have been filed against the petitioner.<br \/>\n\tThe petitioner was avoiding the execution of the order dated<br \/>\n\t13.9.2011 passed by respondent No.2 under Section 3(1) of the PASA<br \/>\n\tAct wherein the grounds of detention were incorporated. The said<br \/>\n\tdetention order was approved by the Home Department, State of<br \/>\n\tGujarat under Section 3(3) of PASA Act. He, therefore, contended<br \/>\n\tthat looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, petition<br \/>\n\tmay be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Heard<br \/>\n\tlearned Counsel for both the sides. I have also perused the police<br \/>\n\tpapers and other papers produced before me. I have also considered<br \/>\n\tthe decision cited in the case of ALPESH NAVINCHANDRA SHAH v\/s STATE<br \/>\n\tOF MAHARASHTRA, reported in AIR 2007 SC (supp) 570, in which it is<br \/>\n\theld that the order of detention of the brother of the detenu was<br \/>\n\trevoked, on the opinion of advisory board and the detenu was<br \/>\n\tsimilarly placed and, therefore, his detention order was revoked<br \/>\n\tbefore execution on the ground that he is also entitled to the same<br \/>\n\ttreatment.\n<\/p>\n<p>From<br \/>\n\tthe record, it appears that in connection with FRI being CR No.<br \/>\n\t41\/09 lodged against the petitioner, the petitioner was acquitted by<br \/>\n\tthe learned Special Judge, Viramgam of all the charges levelled<br \/>\n\tagainst him. It further appears that in connection with criminal<br \/>\n\tcomplaint being CR No. M. Case No.3\/09, there was a settlement<br \/>\n\tbetween the complainant and one Nitinbhai Bhaichand Shah and the<br \/>\n\tdispute was resolved  on 25th August, 2010, wherein, the<br \/>\n\tpetitioner had witnessed the said document. Another offence was<br \/>\n\tlodged against the petitioner by one Chothiben wd\/o Manubhai on<br \/>\n\tFebruary 21, 2011 in regard to the incident that had occurred in the<br \/>\n\tyear 2008. Thus, the said FIR was lodged after the delay of four<br \/>\n\tyears. Another FIR was lodged against the petitioner by one<br \/>\n\tDilipbhai Babubhai Ramoliya with Viramgam Rural Police Station being<br \/>\n\tCR No. I-14\/2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 406,<br \/>\n\t420, 467, 468, 471 and 114 of IPC. In said offence, dispute which<br \/>\n\twas disclosed was in fact settled in the year 2009 by exchange of<br \/>\n\tmoney which was not in fact received by the petitioner. Under the<br \/>\n\tsaid settlement, some cheques were given in pursuance of the<br \/>\n\tsettlement and the said cheques were misused by the first informant<br \/>\n\tof the said offence and had filed a complaint under Section 138 of<br \/>\n\tthe N.I. Act against the petitioners. The said cheques were in fact<br \/>\n\tin respect of purchase of gold in relation to settlement arrived at<br \/>\n\tbetween the parties on 21st February, 2009.  In the said<br \/>\n\toffence also, there was  a settlement arrived at  on January 25,<br \/>\n\t2011. In pursuance to the said settlement, learned Metropolitan<br \/>\n\tMagistrate Court, Ahmedabad disposed of the said complaint.  Thus,<br \/>\n\tthe allegations against the petitioner are relating to property<br \/>\n\tdispute which is within the realm of personal dispute between the<br \/>\n\tparties and therefore, no allegations can be made against the<br \/>\n\tpetitioner relating to disturbance of law and order, much less,<br \/>\n\tpublic order.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tthe case of Alka Subhas Gadia, reported in 1992 (Supply)(1) SCC 496,<br \/>\n\twhere the Hon&#8217;ble Apex Court has observed, as under :\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;&#8230;..The Courts<br \/>\nhave the necessary power and they have used it in proper cases as has<br \/>\nbeen pointed out above, although such cases have been few and the<br \/>\ngrounds on which the courts have interfered with them at the<br \/>\npre-execution stage are necessarily very limited in scope and number,<br \/>\nviz. Where the courts are prima facie satisfied (i) that the impugned<br \/>\norder is not passed under the Act under which it is purported to have<br \/>\nbeen passed, (ii) that it is sought to be executed against a wrong<br \/>\nperson, (iii) that it is passed for a wrong person, (iv) that it is<br \/>\npassed on vague, extraneous and irrelevant grounds, or (v) that the<br \/>\nauthority which passed it had no authority to do so. The refusal by<br \/>\nthe courts to use their extraordinary powers of judicial review to<br \/>\ninterfere with the detention order prior to their execution on any<br \/>\nother ground does not amount to the abandonment of the said power or<br \/>\nto their denial to the proposed detenu, but, prevents their abuse and<br \/>\nthe prevention of the law in question.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>From the above, it appears<br \/>\nthat the case of the petitioner falls in exception (iv) as suggested<br \/>\nby the Hon&#8217;ble Apex Court in the said decision.\n<\/p>\n<p>I<br \/>\n\tam of the opinion that the order of detention dated 8.10.2011 passed<br \/>\n\tagainst the petitioner is not passed in genuine exercise of the<br \/>\n\tpowers of the Act, because, once the detention order passed in the<br \/>\n\tmonth of September, 2011, on the basis of some cases and the<br \/>\n\tpetitioner could not be detained, the detaining Authority is enraged<br \/>\n\t and it has again resorted to powers to detain the petitioner again<br \/>\n\tunder the same Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tthe present case, it clearly appears from the record that in most of<br \/>\n\tthe cases, there has been settlement arrived at and the same were<br \/>\n\twithin the realm of personal dispute between the parties and,<br \/>\n\ttherefore, in my opinion, the order of detention dated 8.10.2011,<br \/>\n\tpassed by the District Magistrate, Ahmedabad, against the petitioner<br \/>\n\tis required to be quashed and set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tview of above, this petition is allowed. The order of detention<br \/>\n\tdated 8.10.2011 passed by the District Magistrate, Ahmedabad,<br \/>\n\tagainst the petitioner, is quashed and set aside. Rule is made<br \/>\n\tabsolute accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn view of above order<br \/>\n\tCivil Application No.10699 of 2011 does not survive and same stands<br \/>\n\tdisposed of. Direct service is permitted.\n<\/p>\n<p>(Z.K.SAIYED,<br \/>\nJ.)<\/p>\n<p>kks<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Shantilal vs State on 14 October, 2011 Author: Z.K.Saiyed, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/14608\/2011 8\/ 8 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14608 of 2011 With CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10699 of 2011 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14608 of 2011 For Approval [&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-125866","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 v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Shantilal vs State on 14 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shantilal vs State on 14 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-06-21T11:39:39+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\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shantilal vs State on 14 October, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-06-21T11:39:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1398,\"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\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011\",\"name\":\"Shantilal vs State on 14 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-06-21T11:39:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shantilal vs State on 14 October, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/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":"Shantilal vs State on 14 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shantilal vs State on 14 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-06-21T11:39:39+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\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shantilal vs State on 14 October, 2011","datePublished":"2011-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-06-21T11:39:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011"},"wordCount":1398,"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\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011","name":"Shantilal vs State on 14 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-06-21T11:39:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shantilal-vs-state-on-14-october-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shantilal vs State on 14 October, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/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\/125866","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=125866"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125866\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=125866"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=125866"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=125866"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}