{"id":135012,"date":"2008-09-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008"},"modified":"2015-09-14T13:03:20","modified_gmt":"2015-09-14T07:33:20","slug":"ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Ghcl vs State on 2 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Ghcl vs State on 2 September, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Anant S. Dave,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCR.A\/1119\/2008\t 4\/ 4\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1119 of 2008\n \n\n \n==========================================\n \n\nGHCL\nLIMITED &amp; 2 - Applicant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT &amp; 1 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n==========================================\n \n\n \nAppearance\n: \nM\/S TRIVEDI\n&amp; GUPTA for Applicant(s) : 1 - 3. \nPUBLIC\nPROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 1, \nMR RITURAJ M MEENA for\nRespondent(s) : 2, \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 ANANT S. DAVE\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 02\/09\/2008 \n\n \n\nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>1.\t\tHeard<br \/>\nlearned advocate Mr. Naik with Mr. Kunal Naik for Ms\/ Trivedi and<br \/>\nGupta, Mr. Rituraj Meena for respondent No.2 and learned Additional<br \/>\nPublic Prosecutor  Mr. K. T Dave for respondent No.1.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\t\tOn<br \/>\n18th June 2008 the following order was passed by this<br \/>\nCourt (Coram: Hon&#8217;ble Ms Justice H.N. Devani).\n<\/p>\n<p>Heard<br \/>\n\tMr.Rakesh Gupta, learned advocate with Mr.Kunal Naik, learned<br \/>\n\tadvocate for M\/s Trivedi &amp; Gupta Advocates, learned advocates<br \/>\n\tfor the petitioners.\n<\/p>\n<p>Attention<br \/>\n\tof the Court is drawn to the allegations made in the complaint to<br \/>\n\tpoint out that the main allegation is that the petitioners have<br \/>\n\tcommitted breach of the provisions of the notification dated 14th<br \/>\n\tSeptember, 2006 issued by the Ministry of Environment &amp; Forests.<br \/>\n\t Referring to the notification dated 14th September,<br \/>\n\t2006, it is pointed out that the same applies only to new projects<br \/>\n\tor activities or on the expansion of modernization of existing<br \/>\n\tprojects or activities based on their potential environmental<br \/>\n\timpacts.  It is submitted that insofar as the Company in question is<br \/>\n\tconcerned, the same has not undertaken any new project or activities<br \/>\n\tor expansion or modernization.  It is submitted that, in the<br \/>\n\tcircumstances, provisions of notification dated 14th<br \/>\n\tSeptember, 2006 would not be applicable.  However, to be on the<br \/>\n\tsafer side, the Company has made application under the said<br \/>\n\tnotification dated 14th September, 2006, and the same is<br \/>\n\tpending clearance before the concerned authority.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tthe aforesaid circumstances, issue notice returnable  on 8th<br \/>\n\tJuly, 2008.  By way of ad-interim relief, further proceedings<br \/>\n\tpursuant to the Criminal Case No.1242 of 2007 pending before the<br \/>\n\tlearned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Veraval, are hereby stayed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mrs.M.L.Shah,<br \/>\n\tlearned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice on<br \/>\n\tbehalf of the respondent No.1   State of Gujarat.\n<\/p>\n<p>Direct<br \/>\n\tservice is permitted qua respondent No.2.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.<br \/>\n Learned counsel  appearing for the petitioner submitted that lease<br \/>\ndeed for mining limestone,  was granted to the petitioner  and<br \/>\nthereafter  no new mining operation have been started by the company<br \/>\nafter the issuance  of notification dated 14th September<br \/>\n2006. Not only  that after issuance of notification, the company had<br \/>\nalready applied for getting environmental clearance to the Government<br \/>\nof India  which came to be granted by certificate dated 31st<br \/>\nJuly 2008 by the Ministry  of Environmental  and Forest of the<br \/>\nGovernment of India.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.1\t\tIn<br \/>\naddition to  the above  learned counsel further submitted that  para<br \/>\n16 of the complaint  alleges breach of provisions  of notification<br \/>\ndated 14th September 2006 issued by the Ministry of<br \/>\nEnvironment  and Forests, Government of India, and admittedly  the<br \/>\ncomplaint  by  and large referred to the report  dated 10th<br \/>\nAugust 2006 of the mines area managed by the petitioner prior to<br \/>\nissuance of the notification.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.2\t\tLearned<br \/>\ncounsel  further submitted that neither  the the petitioners have<br \/>\nconstructed nor expanded their activities  which require any<br \/>\nclearance as per the above notification and therefore the respondent<br \/>\nis not  empowered to complain under this Act. Learned advocate<br \/>\nfurther submitted that incidentally  reference is made about<br \/>\nnon-observation of certain provisions of the Water Act, the Air Act.<br \/>\nIn view of above, according to the learned counsel  for the<br \/>\npetitioner ad interim relief  granted earlier to continue as interim<br \/>\nrelief.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\t\tMr.\n<\/p>\n<p>Rituraj Meena  learned advocate submitted  that apart from the<br \/>\nalleged breach of notification dated 14th September 2006<br \/>\nas found  on the inspection of the site,    petitioner herein was<br \/>\ncarrying out mining activity  by violating certain provisions of the<br \/>\nAir Act, water Act and environment clearance  was not obtained as<br \/>\nenvisaged under the notification. Learned advocate further submitted<br \/>\nthat the petitioner herein is supposed to follow and comply with the<br \/>\nprovisions of the Air Act, water Act and provisions contained in<br \/>\nvarious notifications issued even prior to the notification dated<br \/>\n14th September 2006.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\t\tThus<br \/>\naccording to the learned counsel for respondent No. 2, the  complaint<br \/>\n need not be stayed and ad interim relief granted by the order dated<br \/>\n18th June 2008 may be vacated.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\t\tHaving<br \/>\nheard learned counsel appearing  for the parties and perusal of the<br \/>\nrecord including  the notification dated 14th November<br \/>\n2006 and the inspection report of the mines area of the applicant,<br \/>\nsubsequent  certificate by Ministry of Environment  and Forests<br \/>\ngranting environmental clearance and the pleadings of the parties,<br \/>\nprima facie I am of the opinion that the allegations  in the<br \/>\ncomplaint  are for breach of notification dated 14th<br \/>\nSeptember 2006 which came to be published in the Gazette and became<br \/>\neffective after  the visit to site  by the officer on 10th<br \/>\nAugust 2006. Besides applicability  of the environment (Protection)<br \/>\nAct 1986, specifically the penal provisions  for non-compliance  of<br \/>\nprovisions  of other Acts, namely the Air Act and Water Act deserves<br \/>\nconsideration at this stage.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\t\tHence,<br \/>\nRule  returnable on  12th November 2008. Learned advocate<br \/>\nappearing  for respective parties  waives service  of rule. By way of<br \/>\nInterim relief ad-interim relief granted earlier of  further<br \/>\nproceedings of Criminal case  No. 1242 of 2007 registered before the<br \/>\nCourt of Judicial Magistrate, First Class Veraval to continue till<br \/>\nfurther order.  However, this will not preclude  the respondent GPCB<br \/>\nNo. 2 herein  to take action in accordance with law for breach  if<br \/>\nany  by the applicant under provisions of any other Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(Anant<br \/>\nS. Dave,J.)<\/p>\n<p>mary\/\/<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Ghcl vs State on 2 September, 2008 Author: Anant S. Dave,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCR.A\/1119\/2008 4\/ 4 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1119 of 2008 ========================================== GHCL LIMITED &amp; 2 &#8211; Applicant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT &amp; 1 &#8211; Respondent(s) [&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-135012","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Ghcl vs State on 2 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ghcl vs State on 2 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-09-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-09-14T07:33:20+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ghcl vs State on 2 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-14T07:33:20+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":858,\"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\\\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Ghcl vs State on 2 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-14T07:33:20+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ghcl vs State on 2 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ghcl vs State on 2 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ghcl vs State on 2 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-09-14T07:33:20+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ghcl vs State on 2 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-14T07:33:20+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008"},"wordCount":858,"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\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008","name":"Ghcl vs State on 2 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-14T07:33:20+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ghcl-vs-state-on-2-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ghcl vs State on 2 September, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/135012","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=135012"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/135012\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=135012"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=135012"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=135012"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}