{"id":136271,"date":"2011-08-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-08-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011"},"modified":"2016-09-26T05:42:13","modified_gmt":"2016-09-26T00:12:13","slug":"whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011","title":{"rendered":"Whether vs State on 30 August, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Whether vs State on 30 August, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: M.R. Shah,<\/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\nSCR.A\/865\/2011\t 6\/ 6\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\nCRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 865 of 2011\n \n\nWITH\nSPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1408 of 2011\n \n\n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH\n \n=========================================\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n1.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nNo\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n2.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nTo\n\t\t\t\tbe referred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nNo\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n3.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nNo\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n4.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nNo\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n5.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nNo\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n=========================================\n \n\nGHANSHYAM\nBHAILALBHAI SOLANKI - Applicant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT &amp; 1 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n========================================= \nAppearance\n: \nMR PP\nMAJMUDAR for\nApplicant(s) : 1, \nMR KP RAVAL, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for\nRespondent(s) : 1, \nNOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 2, \nMR.\nHARDIK J JANI for Respondent(s) :\n2, \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 M.R. SHAH\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 30\/08\/2011 \n\n \n\nCOMMON\nORAL JUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>[1.0]\t\tRULE.\n<\/p>\n<p>Shri K.P. Raval, learned<br \/>\nAdditional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of Rule on<br \/>\nbehalf of respondent No.1 &#8211; State and Shri Hardik Jani, learned<br \/>\nadvocate appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 &#8211; original<br \/>\ncomplainant waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent<br \/>\nNo.2 in each of the petitions.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn the facts and<br \/>\ncircumstances of the case and with the consent of learned advocates<br \/>\nappearing for respective parties, both the petitions are taken up for<br \/>\nfinal hearing today.\n<\/p>\n<p>[2.0]\t\tSpecial<br \/>\nCriminal Application No.865\/2011 has been preferred by the petitioner\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8211; original accused No.1 viz. Ghanshyambhai Bhailalbhai Solanki<br \/>\nto quash and set aside the impugned complaint\/FIR being C.R.<br \/>\nNo.I-9\/2010 registered with Antarsuba Police Station, District Kheda<br \/>\nas well as all further consequential proceedings thereto pursuant to<br \/>\nthe aforesaid criminal complaint.\n<\/p>\n<p>[2.1]\t\tSpecial<br \/>\nCriminal Application No.1408\/2011 has been preferred by the<br \/>\npetitioner &#8211; original accused No.2 viz. Kesharben Bhailalbhai<br \/>\nSolanki to quash and set aside the impugned complaint\/FIR being C.R.<br \/>\nNo.I-9\/2010 registered with Antarsuba Police Station, District Kheda<br \/>\nas well as all further consequential proceedings thereto pursuant to<br \/>\nthe aforesaid criminal complaint.\n<\/p>\n<p>[3.0]\t\tRespondent<br \/>\nNo.2 herein &#8211; original complainant has lodged FIR being C.R.<br \/>\nNo.I-9\/2010 with Antarsuba Police Station, District Kheda against the<br \/>\nrespective petitioners &#8211; original accused for the offences<br \/>\npunishable under Sections 363, 366 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code,<br \/>\n1860 (hereinafter referred to as &#8220;IPC&#8221;) alleging<br \/>\ninter-alia that her daughter<br \/>\nAnkita has been kidnapped and\/or abducted by the petitioners &#8211;<br \/>\noriginal accused for the purpose of marriage and with mala fide<br \/>\nintention.  It is also alleged in the said complaint that accused<br \/>\npersons have also withdrawn an amount of Rs.90,000\/- which was in the<br \/>\nbank account of her daughter Ankita which<br \/>\nwas his amount, which was given to her daughter only for the purpose<br \/>\nof depositing the same in her bank account.\n<\/p>\n<p>[3.1]\t\tBeing<br \/>\naggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid FIR, the respective<br \/>\npetitioners have preferred present Special Criminal Applications<br \/>\nunder Article 226 of Constitution of India read with Section 482 of<br \/>\nthe Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as<br \/>\n&#8220;CrPC&#8221;) to quash and set aside the impugned FIR by<br \/>\nsubmitting that as such petitioners have not committed any offence as<br \/>\nalleged.\n<\/p>\n<p>[4.0]\t\tShri P.P.\n<\/p>\n<p>Majmudar, learned advocate appearing on behal of the respective<br \/>\npetitioners has vehemently submitted that as such the petitioners<br \/>\nhave not committed any offence as alleged.  It is submitted that in<br \/>\nfact the daughter of the original complainant, Ankita who is now the<br \/>\nwife of original accused No.1 had gone voluntarily with original<br \/>\naccused No.1 as she wanted to marry him and she was apprehending that<br \/>\ntheir parents will marry her elsewhere against her wish.  It is<br \/>\nsubmitted that at present the original complainant is residing with<br \/>\nthe petitioners happily.\n<\/p>\n<p>[4.1]\t\tSo<br \/>\nfar as the allegation with respect to the withdrawal of Rs.90,000\/-<br \/>\nfrom the bank account of Ankita, which according to the original<br \/>\ncomplainant belongs to him is concerned, Shri Majmudar, learned<br \/>\nadvocate appearing on behalf of the respective petitioners has stated<br \/>\nat the Bar that original accused No.1 is ready and willing to return<br \/>\nthe said amount to the original complainant.  He has stated at the<br \/>\nBar that out of the aforesaid amount of Rs.90,000\/-, Rs.20,000\/- is<br \/>\nalready paid today to the original complainant<br \/>\nby cash and the balance amount of Rs.70,000\/- shall be returned by<br \/>\noriginal accused No.1 to the original complainant within a period of<br \/>\ntwo months by two equal monthly installments to be paid on or before<br \/>\n30.10.2011.  Shri Majmudar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of<br \/>\nthe petitioners has also stated at the Bar that original accused No.1<br \/>\nshall file an undertaking to the aforesaid effect to return the<br \/>\nbalance amount of Rs.70,000\/- on or before 30.10.2011 by two monthly<br \/>\ninstallments of Rs.35,000\/- each with this Court within a period of<br \/>\none week from today.  Therefore, it is requested to allow the present<br \/>\npetitions.\n<\/p>\n<p>[5.0]\t\tShri Hardik<br \/>\nJani, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original<br \/>\ncomplainant has submitted that original complainant is a very poor<br \/>\nperson and he has deposited his hard earned money in the bank account<br \/>\nof his daughter Ankita, which has been withdrawn by original accused<br \/>\nNo.1.  It is submitted that if the aforesaid amount of Rs.90,000\/- is<br \/>\nreturned to the original complainant and in view of the stand taken<br \/>\nby his daughter now that she has married with original accused No.1,<br \/>\nhe has no objection if the impugned FIR is quashed and set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>[5.1]\t\tShri K.P.\n<\/p>\n<p>Raval, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has requested to pass<br \/>\nappropriate order in the facts and circumstances of the case, more<br \/>\nparticularly, the statement of the daughter of the complainant viz.<br \/>\nAnkita which is a zerox copy, which is produced on record.\n<\/p>\n<p>[6.0]\t\tHeard<br \/>\nthe learned advocates appearing for respective parties at length.  At<br \/>\nthe outset, it is required to be noted that respondent<br \/>\nNo.2 herein &#8211; original complainant has lodged the FIR being<br \/>\nI-C.R. No.9\/2010 with Antarsuba Police Station, District Kheda<br \/>\nagainst the petitioners for offences punishable under Sections 363,<br \/>\n366 and 114 of the IPC alleging inter-alia that<br \/>\nhis daughter has been abducted\/kidnapped by them.  It is also alleged<br \/>\nin the complaint that original accused No.1 has withdrawn the amount<br \/>\nof Rs.90,000\/- from the bank account of Ankita &#8211; daughter of<br \/>\nthe original complainant which actually belongs to the original<br \/>\ncomplainant.\n<\/p>\n<p>[6.1]\t\tDuring<br \/>\nthe course of the investigation, statement of Ankita &#8211; daughter<br \/>\nof the original complainant who is now wife of original accused No.1\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8211; Ghanshaymbhai Bhailalbhai Solanki has been recorded on<br \/>\n29.08.2011 and she has categorically stated that petitioners have not<br \/>\ncommitted any offence as alleged and that she has gone voluntarily<br \/>\nwith original accused No.1 as she wanted to marry him.  She has also<br \/>\nstated that now she has married with original accused No.1 &#8211;<br \/>\nGhanshyambhai Bhailalbhai Solanki and their marriage has also been<br \/>\nregistered before the Registrar of Marriages.  Shri Majmudar, learned<br \/>\nadvocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners has also stated at<br \/>\nthe Bar that the petitioners are ready and willing to return the<br \/>\namount of Rs.90,000\/- to the original complainant out of which<br \/>\nRs.20,000\/- is already paid to the original complainant in cash today<br \/>\nand that the balance amount of Rs.70,000\/- shall be returned to the<br \/>\noriginal complainant on or before 30.10.2011 by two equal monthly<br \/>\ninstallments.  Under the circumstances and in view of the above, it<br \/>\nappears to the Court that this is a fit case to exercise powers under<br \/>\nSection 482 of the CrPC and<br \/>\nto quash and set aside the impugned FIR as, to continue the criminal<br \/>\nproceedings against the petitioners shall be abuse of process of law<br \/>\nand Court.  Even considering the statement of Ankita &#8211; daughter<br \/>\nof the original complainant, the criminal proceedings against the<br \/>\npetitioners cannot be continued.\n<\/p>\n<p>[7.0]\t\tIn view of<br \/>\nthe above and for the reasons stated above, both the petitions<br \/>\nsucceed.  Impugned FIR being I-C.R. No.9\/2010 registered with<br \/>\nAntarsuba Police Station, District Kheda against the respective<br \/>\npetitioners for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366 and 114 of<br \/>\nthe IPC is hereby quashed and set aside so far as the respective<br \/>\npetitioners are concerned.  Original accused No.1 &#8211;<br \/>\nGhanshyambhai Bhailalbhai Solanki to return the balance amount of<br \/>\nRs.70,000\/- to the original complainant on or before 30.10.2011 by<br \/>\ntwo monthly installments of Rs.35,000\/- each as stated by Shri<br \/>\nMajmudar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respective<br \/>\npetitioners.  Original accused No.1 &#8211; Ghanshyambhai Bhailalbhai<br \/>\nSolanki to file undertaking to the aforesaid effect within a period<br \/>\nof one week from today.  Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid<br \/>\nextent in each of the petitions.  Liberty to submit appropriate<br \/>\napplication by the original complainant in present proceeding in case<br \/>\nthe aforesaid amount of Rs.70,000\/- is not returned to the original<br \/>\ncomplainant within the stipulated time stated herein above.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(M.R.\n<\/p>\n<p>Shah, J.)<\/p>\n<p>*menon<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Whether vs State on 30 August, 2011 Author: M.R. Shah, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCR.A\/865\/2011 6\/ 6 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 865 of 2011 WITH SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1408 of 2011 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH [&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-136271","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>Whether vs State on 30 August, 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\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Whether vs State on 30 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-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=\"2011-08-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-09-26T00:12:13+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Whether vs State on 30 August, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-26T00:12:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1321,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011\",\"name\":\"Whether vs State on 30 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-09-26T00:12:13+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Whether vs State on 30 August, 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":"Whether vs State on 30 August, 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\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Whether vs State on 30 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-08-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-09-26T00:12:13+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Whether vs State on 30 August, 2011","datePublished":"2011-08-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-26T00:12:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011"},"wordCount":1321,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011","name":"Whether vs State on 30 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-08-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-09-26T00:12:13+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-30-august-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Whether vs State on 30 August, 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\/136271","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=136271"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/136271\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=136271"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=136271"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=136271"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}