{"id":127675,"date":"2008-08-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008"},"modified":"2018-10-27T10:32:25","modified_gmt":"2018-10-27T05:02:25","slug":"prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Prabhubhai vs State on 13 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Prabhubhai vs State on 13 August, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: A.M.Kapadia,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Z.K.Saiyed,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/690\/2001\t 20\/ 20\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 690 of 2001\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA  \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\nPRABHUBHAI\nJAGABHAI BHIL - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nJM BUDDHBHATTI appointed by Legal Aid Committee for Appellant \nMR\nKC SHAH APP for Respondent ?  State of\nGujarat \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 13\/08\/2008 \n\n \n\n \n \n\t\t\t\tORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n
(Per
\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA)<\/p>\n
1.
\nChallenge in this appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of
\nCriminal Procedure (‘the Code’ for short) is to the correctness of
\nthe judgment and order dated 27.7.2001 rendered in Sessions Case
\nNo.253 of 2000 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baroda by
\nwhich the sole appellant\/accused (‘the accused’ for short) has been
\nconvicted for commission of the offence of murder of his wife
\nKashiben punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (‘IPC’
\nfor short) and sentenced to imprisonment for life.\n<\/p>\n
2.\tThe
\nprosecution case as disclosed from the FIR and unfolded during trial
\nis as under:\n<\/p>\n
2.1.\t\tP.W.1,
\nSumitraben Prabhubhai, aged 15 years, daughter of victim-deceased
\nKashiben and accused Prabhubhai Jagabhai Bhil, has lodged a complaint
\nbefore P.W.9, Pramodsinh Fatehsinh Gohil, PSI of Nasvadi Police
\nStation, wherein, inter alia, she has alleged that she is residing at
\nvillage Rengani, Taluka Nasvadi along with her parents and was doing
\nhousehold works and labour. They are three brothers and sisters. She
\nis the eldest, her brother Laxman is younger to her and Ramila is
\nyounger to him. Her father had gone to do labour at village Gothavat,
\nat about 3 O’clock, her brother Laxman had gone to Sim for getting
\nthe goats to graze the grass and the complainant, her mother Kashiben
\nand her younger sister Ramila were present at their house.\n<\/p>\n
\tAt
\nabout 5 O’ clock in the evening on the day of the incident, her
\nfather had returned from his labour work and when he having given
\ntwenty five rupees to her mother, told to purchase tea and sugar and
\nto prepare tea, her mother told that such rupees are earned by her
\neveryday and added what she had to do with his money. So there was
\nexchange of words between her mother and father. Thereafter she had
\ngone to play with the other girls Gitaben and Dholkiben of the street
\nbehind her house and in no time, her younger sister Ramila shouted
\nfrom the house saying that Mummy was killed. On hearing the shouts,
\nshe  rushed to her house and saw  her father beating her mother
\nKashiben with a wooden log. So she having said to stop beating,
\nsnatched away the log of wood from the hands of her father and her
\nfather having taken a spade made of iron which was lying in the
\nhouse, gave four-five blows with the front part of the spade one
\nafter another on the head of her mother; her mother having been
\ncaught in blood stains, had fallen on the ground and at the time of
\nincident, she had gone to protect her mother but her mother had died
\nin no time. So when she took her head in her lap, her clothes had got
\nblood spots. As her mother had died, she had informed the incident to
\nBava Dalsukhbhai residing near her house and when the Sarpanch was
\ninformed about the incident by Mukeshbhai, he came there and she
\naccompanied him to the police station to lodge the complaint in
\nrespect of the offence. As the murder of her mother Kashiben has been
\ncaused by her father by giving blows with the wooden log and with the
\nfront part of the spade, she filed the complaint at Nasvadi Police
\nStation.\n<\/p>\n
2.2.\t\tThe
\naforesaid complaint was recorded by P.W.9, Pramodsinh Fatehsinh Gohil
\nand registered the offence against the accused vide CR No.I-63 of
\n2000 at Nasvadi Police Station for commission of offence punishable
\nunder Section 302 IPC. The said complaint is on record at Ex.8. After
\nregistration of the complaint, he  started investigation. He informed
\nthe Dy.S.P. Dabhoi about the said incident and visited the place of
\noffence. He held inquest on the dead body of Kashiben; sent the dead
\nbody for post mortem examination to the Medical Officer, Tankhala;
\ndrawn panchnama of scene of offence in presence of panchas; collected
\nsample earth and control  earth from the place of offence; recovered
\nwooden log as well as spade used for commission of the offence having
\nblood stain; recovered the blood stained clothes of the complainant,
\nrecorded statements of witnesses; recovered the blood stained clothes
\nput on by deceased Kashiben at the time of incident after the post
\nmortem examination; the accused was arrested and sent the muddamal
\narticles to FSL for chemical analysis.\n<\/p>\n
2.3.\t\tOn
\nreceipt of the post mortem report and FSL report, as sufficient
\nincriminating evidence was found against both the accused, he filed
\ncharge sheet against the accused in the court of learned JMFC,
\nNasvadi.\n<\/p>\n
2.4.\t\tAs
\nthe offence under Section 302 IPC is exclusively triable by a  Court
\nof Sessions, the learned JMFC, Nasvadi committed the case to the
\nCourt of Sessions, Baroda.\n<\/p>\n
2.5.\t\tThe
\nlearned Additional Sessions Judge, Baroda (‘the trial Court’ for
\nshort) to whom the case was made over for trial, framed charge
\nagainst  the accused for commission of the offence punishable under
\nSection 302 IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and
\nclaimed to be tried and thereupon he was put to trial in Sessions
\nCase No. 253 of 2000.\n<\/p>\n
2.6.\t\tTo
\nprove the culpability of the accused, the prosecution has examined 9
\nwitnesses consisting of the complainant, panch witnesses, doctor who
\nperformed autopsy, investigating officer, etc., and relied upon their
\noral testimonies.\n<\/p>\n
2.7.\t\tTo
\nprove the case against the accused, the prosecution has also produced
\na number of documents such as complaint, post-mortem report, FSL
\nreport, panchnamas, etc., and relied upon the contents thereof.\n<\/p>\n
2.8.\t\tAfter
\nrecording of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses was over, the
\ntrial Court explained to the accused the circumstances appearing
\nagainst him and recorded his further statement under Section 313 of
\nthe Code. In his further statement, he denied the case of the
\nprosecution in its entirety. He has stated that he is innocent and
\nhis wife was killed by somebody. His daughter Sumitra with the help
\nof Mukesh and villagers has wrongly trapped him in the murder case.
\nHe has stated that there was no quarrel or dispute between him and
\nhis wife.  However, he has neither led any evidence nor did he
\nexamine any witness in support of his defence.\n<\/p>\n
2.9.\t\tOn appreciation,
\nevaluation, analysis and scrutiny of the evidence on record, the
\ntrial Court came to the conclusion that Kashiben has died a homicidal
\ndeath and the accused is the author of the injuries caused to the
\ndeceased with wooden log and back side of the spade. The trial court
\nhas held that the prosecution has successfully established the
\ncomplicity of the accused for commission of murder of Kashiben. On
\nthe aforesaid finding, the trial court convicted the accused for the
\noffence under Section 302 IPC and he has been sentenced accordingly
\nto which reference is made in the earlier paragraphs of this
\njudgment, which has given rise to instant appeal at the instance of
\naccused.\n<\/p>\n
3. Mr. JM Buddhbhatti,
\nlearned advocate  appointed by the Legal Aid Committee for the
\naccused, has fairly conceded that Kashiben has died a homicidal
\ndeath. However, according to him, there is contradiction with regard
\nto the  time of the incident and, therefore, possibility of falsely
\nroping the accused in a murder case of his wife cannot be ruled out.
\nHe therefore submitted that the impugned judgment and order of
\nconviction and sentence deserves to be quashed and set aside by
\nallowing the appeal. He, therefore, urged to allow the appeal.\n<\/p>\n
4.\tPer
\ncontra,  Mr. K.C. Shah, learned APP for the respondent – State
\nof Gujarat has submitted that there is no infirmity or illegality
\ncommitted by the trial Court in recording the conviction and sentence
\nagainst the accused. Therefore, no interference is called for in the
\nimpugned judgment and order. According to him, there is no reason for
\nthe complainant Sumitraben to falsely give complaint and to  depose
\nin Court  against her father. From her evidence alone the complicity
\nof the accused is proved beyond all doubts. She has categorically
\nstated that the accused is the assailant who  murdered her mother and
\nthere is no contradiction in the complaint as well as in her oral
\ntestimony. He, therefore, urged to dismiss the appeal by confirming
\nthe judgment and order of conviction and sentence recorded against
\nthe accused by the trial court.\n<\/p>\n
5.\t\tThis Court has
\nconsidered the submissions advanced by Mr. JM Buddhbhatti,  learned
\nadvocate for the accused and Mr. K.C. Shah, learned APP for the
\nrespondent ?  State of Gujarat and perused the impugned judgment and
\norder. This Court has undertaken a complete and comprehensive
\nappreciation of all vital features of the case and the entire
\nevidence on record, which is read and re-read by the learned
\nadvocates of the parties with reference to broad and reasonable
\nprobabilities of the case. This Court has examined the entire
\nevidence on record for itself independently of the learned Judge of
\nthe trial Court and considered the arguments advanced on behalf of
\nthe accused and infirmities pressed, scrupulously with a view to find
\nout as to whether the trial Court has rightly recorded the order of
\nconviction and sentence.\n<\/p>\n
6.\t\tThere is no dispute
\nto the fact that  Kashiben has died a homicidal death. Even the
\nlearned advocate for the accused has not raised any dispute in this
\nregard. To prove this fact, the prosecution has examined P.W.8, Dr.
\nMaheshkumar Nagjibhai Sharma, who performed the post mortem
\nexamination on the dead body of Kashiben, at Ex.23. He has issued
\npost mortem report which is on record at Ex.25.\n<\/p>\n
6.1.\t\tOn a conjoint
\nreading of the oral testimony of P.W.8, Dr. Maheshkumar Nagjibhai
\nSharma, Ex.23 and the post mortem report at Ex.25, it is seen that
\nthere was a fracture on the right side of occipital bone 10 to 12 cm
\nlong and 5-6 cm broad size and brain part came out from the wound on
\nthe  skull and the cause of death was  due to head injury followed by
\nfracture of scalp bone.\n<\/p>\n
6.2.\t\tIn view of the
\naforesaid evidence, according to us, the prosecution has established
\nthat Kashiben has died a homicidal death. We are, therefore, of the
\nopinion that the trial court has rightly held that Kashiben has died
\na homicidal death and we accordingly  confirm the said finding and
\nhold that Kashiben died a homicidal death.\n<\/p>\n
7.\t\tNow the next
\nquestion is whether the accused is the author of injuries caused to
\ndeceased Kashiben.\n<\/p>\n
7.1.\t\tThis is a case of
\nmurder of his own wife by the accused and the solitary eye witness is
\na female child named Sumitra, who is the daughter of the victim and
\nthe accused, at the  relevant time aged 15 years, who witnessed the
\ngruesome incident with her own naked eyes.  To prove this, the
\nprosecution has mainly relied upon the  evidence of P.W.1, Sumitra
\nPrabhubhai Bhil, Ex.7. She has inter alia testified as per the
\nnarration given by her in the complaint. She has deposed that her
\nfather had inflicted 2\/3 blows on the head of her mother with a
\nwooden log and as she caught hold of the wooden log, which was in her
\nfather’s hand, her father lifted a spade and inflicted five blows
\nwith its blunt portion on her mother Kashiben. She has also given the
\nmotive for the incident. She has testified that on the day of the
\nincident, her father came home and gave Rs.25\/- to her mother for the
\npurpose of purchasing tea and sugar for preparing tea. Thereupon her
\nmother told him that ‘she is getting such amount every day and what
\nshe should with his money’ and thereupon the quarrel took place and
\nthe accused inflicted injuries to Kashiben as a result of which she
\ndied. She has identified her signature in the complaint. She has also
\nstated that the said complaint is lodged by her in Nasvadi Police
\nStation.\n<\/p>\n
7.2.\t\tIt may be noted
\nthat this witness was cross-examined at length by the learned
\nadvocate for the defence but nothing substantial could be brought out
\nwhich would impeach the credibility of her evidence and she has
\nsuccessfully withstood the test of cross-examination.\n<\/p>\n
7.3.\t\tOn reappraisal of
\nthe evidence of the complainant, according to us, it is clear that
\nthe complainant had witnessed the horrendous incident of murder of
\nher mother by her father and she was so unfortunate a child  that she
\nhad to lodge complaint in the police against her own father and also
\nto depose in Court against him testifying that he is the murderer of
\nher mother. She tried to save her mother but the accused threatened
\nher that he would kill her also. As the complainant caught hold of
\nthe wooden-log in the hand of the accused, he took the spade and
\nassaulted Kashiben. Because of the assault and the resultant
\ninjuries, Kashiben fell down and the complainant took her on her lap
\nand the hot blood that rained down from the deep gush in her head,
\nstained the clothes of the complainant. The complainant is the child
\nof the victim and the accused. It is not very difficult to
\nunderstand the agony she had undergone. On the one hand she has lost
\nher mother and on the other she has also lost the company and
\nprotection from her father, at the tender age of 15 years. But,
\ninspite of all these facts, she has deposed what she had witnessed on
\nthe day of the incident and we have no hesitation in holding that her
\nevidence is trustworthy and there is no reason to discard it.\n<\/p>\n
8.\t\tIt is settled
\nposition of law that evidence of solitary eye witness is sufficient
\nto base order of conviction. In this connection, it would be
\nappropriate to refer to the following two decisions of the Supreme
\nCourt:\n<\/p>\n
8.1.\t\tIn the case of
\n Kunju Alias Balachandran v\/s. State of Tamil Nadu, (2008) 2 SCC
\n151, the Supreme Court has held that conviction on the basis of
\nthe testimony of the sole eyewitness is permissible where the
\ntestimony of sole eyewitness was not shaken although he was
\ncross-examined at length and the same was corroborated by the
\nevidence of another witness who did not support the prosecution
\nversion in toto.\n<\/p>\n
8.2.\t\tIn the case of
\n Krishna Mochi And Others v\/s. State of Bihar, (2002) 6 SCC 81,
\nthe Supreme Court has held that credible evidence of even a solitary
\nwitness can form the basis of conviction.\n<\/p>\n
9.\tAccording to us, the
\nevidence of solitary eye witness Sumitraben is sufficient to
\nestablish the complicity of the accused for the commission of offence
\nof uxoricide. However, to corroborate her evidence, the prosecution
\nhas examined  P.W.4, Dalsukhbhai Jethabhai, Ex.19\/A; P.W.5, Ramabhai
\nHirabhai Tadvi, Ex.19 and P.W.7, Sukhrambhai Karsanbhai, Ex.22.\n<\/p>\n
9.1.\t\tFrom the oral
\ntestimony of P.W.4, Dalsukhbhai Jethabhai, Ex.19\/A  it is seen that
\nhe has been informed about the incident by Sumitraben. So far as
\nP.W.5, Ramabhai Hirabhai Tadvi is concerned, he is the Sarpanch of
\nthe village and  he was informed by Mukeshbhai about the incident
\nthat the accused has killed his wife and therefore he went to the
\nhouse of the accused. So far as the oral testimony of P.W.7,
\nSukhrambhai Karsanbhai,  Ex.22 is concerned, he was informed by
\nP.W.1, Sumitraben and therefore he went to her house and so the dead
\nbody of Kashiben.\n<\/p>\n
9.2.\t\tOn reappraisal of
\nthe evidence of the above three witnesses, it is seen that they
\nimmediately rushed to the scene of occurrence where they saw the
\naccused sitting in the house and the dead body of deceased.\n<\/p>\n
10.\t\tTo further
\ncorroborate the prosecution case, the prosecution has also relied
\nupon the FSL reports which are produced at Exs.30 and 31. The blood
\ngroup of Kashiben was A. It is seen from the FSL reports that  blood
\nof A group was found on the spade and wooden log used by the accused
\nfor commission of murder of Kashiben. Blood of same group was found
\non all the articles which were recovered by drawing panchnamas by the
\ninvestigating officer from the scene of offence and also on the
\nclothes put on by the deceased at the time of incident which were
\nrecovered after post mortem examination was over. The aforesaid
\ncircumstances also corroborate the evidence of the solitary eye
\nwitness P.W.1, Sumitraben. Thus, the more one go into the evidence of
\nthe prosecution, the more clear it becomes that the accused is guilty
\nof the offence of  uxoricide.\n<\/p>\n
11.\tIn view of the
\nclinching and satisfactory evidence of the prosecution witnesses,
\ncomplicity of the accused in commission of the offence of murder of
\nKashiben has been duly established. Suffice it to say that the trial
\nCourt has given cogent and convincing reason for convicting the
\naccused for commission of offence under Section 302 IPC and Mr. JM
\nBuddhbhatti, learned advocate for the accused could not dislodge the
\nsaid reasons given by the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n
12.\t\tWe find ourselves
\nin complete agreement with the finding, ultimate conclusion and the
\nresultant order of conviction and sentence recorded by the trial
\nCourt, as according to us, no other finding, conclusion and order, is
\npossible except the one reached by the trial Court, which is required
\nto be affirmed by us.\n<\/p>\n
13.\tSeen in the above
\ncontext, there is no reason or justifiable ground to interfere with
\nthe impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by
\nthe trial Court, and as the appeal lacks merit, it deserves to be
\ndismissed by confirming the judgment and order passed by the trial
\nCourt.\n<\/p>\n
14.\t\tFor the foregoing
\nreasons, the appeal fails and accordingly it is dismissed.
\nResultantly, the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated
\n27.7.2001 rendered in Sessions Case No.253 of 2000 by the learned
\nAdditional Sessions Judge, Baroda, is hereby confirmed and
\nmaintained.\n<\/p>\n
(A.M.Kapadia,J.)<\/p>\n
(Z.K.Saiyed,J.)<\/p>\n
…\n<\/p>\n
(karan)<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Prabhubhai vs State on 13 August, 2008 Author: A.M.Kapadia,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Z.K.Saiyed,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/690\/2001 20\/ 20 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 690 of 2001 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local […]<\/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-127675","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nPrabhubhai vs State on 13 August, 2008 - 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\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Prabhubhai vs State on 13 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-08-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-27T05:02:25+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=\"16 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Prabhubhai vs State on 13 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-27T05:02:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":2956,\"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\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Prabhubhai vs State on 13 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-27T05:02:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Prabhubhai vs State on 13 August, 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:\/\/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":"Prabhubhai vs State on 13 August, 2008 - 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\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Prabhubhai vs State on 13 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-27T05:02:25+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":"16 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Prabhubhai vs State on 13 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-27T05:02:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008"},"wordCount":2956,"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\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008","name":"Prabhubhai vs State on 13 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-27T05:02:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhubhai-vs-state-on-13-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Prabhubhai vs State on 13 August, 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:\/\/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\/127675","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=127675"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/127675\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=127675"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=127675"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=127675"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}