{"id":137406,"date":"2010-08-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010"},"modified":"2017-01-22T00:19:53","modified_gmt":"2017-01-21T18:49:53","slug":"madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"Madhu vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Madhu vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCrl.Rev.Pet.No. 428 of 2002()\n\n\n1. MADHU, S\/O.MADHAVAN BHATTATHIRI,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n2. SUNIL, S\/O.MADHU, KANMANI BHAVAN,\n3. ANIL, S\/O.MADHU, KANMANI BHAVAN,\n4. PRAVEEN @ KANNAN, KANMANI BHAVAN,\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.GOVIND K.BHARATHAN (SR.)\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR\n\n Dated :11\/08\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n             M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.\n            --------------------------\n              Crl.R.P.No.428 of 2002\n            --------------------------\n\n                       ORDER\n<\/pre>\n
    First petitioner is the father and the other<\/p>\n
petitioners his children.  They were convicted and<\/p>\n
sentenced for the offence under Section 3(1) of<\/p>\n
Prevention  of  Damage   to  Public  Property   Act<\/p>\n
(hereinafter referred to as ‘the PDPP Act’) and<\/p>\n
Sections 447 and 427 of Indian Penal Code by<\/p>\n
Judicial First Class Magistrate, Vaikom in C.C.No.<\/p>\n
356 of 1993.    The prosecution case was that on<\/p>\n
9.11.1991  at about 11.30 a.m, in furtherance of<\/p>\n
the common intention, petitioners trespassed into<\/p>\n
the property belonging to the Government and under<\/p>\n
the control of the Medical Officer, Talayolaparamba<\/p>\n
Public Health Centre comprised in Sy.No.210\/3 of<\/p>\n
Vadayar Village, demolished the eastern compound<\/p>\n
wall and formed a road on the south-east portion of<\/p>\n
the compound and thereby caused mischief to the<\/p>\n
extent of Rs.3,000\/- to the Government property and<\/p>\n
CRRP 428\/02               2<\/span><\/p>\n
committed the offences.\n<\/p>\n
     2.     PW1 the Chief Medical Officer, lodged<\/p>\n
Ext.P1 complaint before the Sub Inspector of Police<\/p>\n
on 19.12.1991 and Crime 699\/91 of Vaikom police<\/p>\n
station was registered under Ext.P3 FIR.   PW6, the<\/p>\n
Investigating    Officer,   prepared  Ext.P4   scene<\/p>\n
mahazar and obtained Ext.P2 report from PW2, the<\/p>\n
Village Officer.   Though the case was registered as<\/p>\n
against the first petitioner and others, by Ext.P6<\/p>\n
report     names of  the  other  accused were   also<\/p>\n
incorporated.    After completing the investigation,<\/p>\n
charge was laid, which was taken cognizance by the<\/p>\n
learned Magistrate. Petitioners pleaded not guilty.<\/p>\n
The prosecution examined six witnesses and marked<\/p>\n
six   exhibits.   Petitioners  did  not adduce   any<\/p>\n
evidence. Learned Magistrate on the evidence of PWs<\/p>\n
1, 2 and 6, though the other witnesses turned<\/p>\n
hostile, convicted the petitioners and sentenced<\/p>\n
them to rigorous imprisonment for three years for<\/p>\n
the offence under Section 3(1) of the PDPP Act   and<\/p>\n
CRRP 428\/02              3<\/span><\/p>\n
for one month for the offence under Section 447.<\/p>\n
No separate sentence was passed for the offence<\/p>\n
under Section 427 of Indian Penal Code.      Though<\/p>\n
petitioners challenged the conviction and sentence<\/p>\n
before the learned Sessions Court, Kottayam in<\/p>\n
Crl.A.No.14\/1997, learned Additional Sessions Judge<\/p>\n
on   re-appreciation  of  evidence   confirmed  the<\/p>\n
conviction and sentence and dismissed the appeal.<\/p>\n
It is challenged in the revision.\n<\/p>\n
     3.    Learned  counsel   appearing   for   the<\/p>\n
petitioners   and learned  Public  Prosecutor  were<\/p>\n
heard.\n<\/p>\n
     4. Though PWs 3, 4 and 5 were examined to<\/p>\n
corroborate   the  evidence of   PW1,  they  turned<\/p>\n
hostile. PW2 the Village Officer who submitted<\/p>\n
Ext.P2 report on the request of the Investigating<\/p>\n
Officer has no personal knowledge with regard to<\/p>\n
the incident that took place on 9.11.1991.    Hence<\/p>\n
the only evidence is that of PW1 to prove the<\/p>\n
incident.   The question is how far the evidence of<\/p>\n
CRRP 428\/02                4<\/span><\/p>\n
PW1 is credible and reliable.\n<\/p>\n
     5.    Though the incident alleged to have taken<\/p>\n
place on 9.11.1991, Ext.P1 complaint was filed only<\/p>\n
on 19.12.1991.    In Ext.P1, PW1 has alleged that he<\/p>\n
witnessed the incident apart from the staff of the<\/p>\n
hospital.    PW1 had given only the name of the first<\/p>\n
petitioner and described the others as his “son and<\/p>\n
others”.    Even though petitioners 2 to 4 are the<\/p>\n
sons of the first petitioner, he did not specify<\/p>\n
the name of the son, to identify the person.      The<\/p>\n
names of petitioners 2 to 4 were incorporated based<\/p>\n
on Ext.P6 report submitted on 20.12.1991. When<\/p>\n
Ext.P1 complaint was filed more than one month<\/p>\n
after the incident, if PW1 had known petitioners 2<\/p>\n
to 4 at that time, in the ordinary course he would<\/p>\n
have definitely stated about the names of all the<\/p>\n
petitioners and would not have alleged that the<\/p>\n
offence was committed by the first petitioner, his<\/p>\n
son and others.    Others mentioned therein cannot be<\/p>\n
the other sons of the first petitioner as otherwise<\/p>\n
CRRP 428\/02                5<\/span><\/p>\n
it would have been stated that the petitioner and<\/p>\n
his sons.     Even when PW1 was examined, he has not<\/p>\n
specifically identified any of petitioners 2 to 4,<\/p>\n
as the persons who was named as the son of the<\/p>\n
first petitioner in Ext.P1 FI statement.     If that<\/p>\n
be so, based on the evidence of PW1, it cannot be<\/p>\n
safely held that petitioners 2 to 4 committed the<\/p>\n
offences. Hence, conviction of petitioners 2 to 4<\/p>\n
cannot be sustained.\n<\/p>\n
     7.    But,  the  case  as  against   the  first<\/p>\n
petitioner stands on a different footing. If the<\/p>\n
evidence of PW1 is credible and reliable as against<\/p>\n
the first petitioner, the conviction warrants no<\/p>\n
interference. The fact that the compound wall of<\/p>\n
the hospital was demolished and a new road was cut<\/p>\n
opened through the hospital compound is proved by<\/p>\n
the evidence of PW1. It is also corroborated by<\/p>\n
Exhibit P2 report submitted by PW2, the Village<\/p>\n
Officer, as well as the evidence of PW6, the<\/p>\n
Investigating Officer, who inspected the property<\/p>\n
CRRP 428\/02              6<\/span><\/p>\n
and    prepared  Exhibit  P4   scene   mahazar   on<\/p>\n
20.12.1991. I have scanned the evidence of PW1 and<\/p>\n
find no reason to disbelieve his evidence, which<\/p>\n
was accepted by the trial court as well as by the<\/p>\n
appellate court. Evidence of PW1 establishes that<\/p>\n
first petitioner was one among the persons who cut<\/p>\n
opened a road through the hospital compound after<\/p>\n
demolishing a portion of the eastern compound wall.<\/p>\n
In such circumstances, conviction of the first<\/p>\n
petitioner for the offences under Sections 447 and<\/p>\n
427 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) of PDPP<\/p>\n
Act     is  perfectly  legal   and   warrants    no<\/p>\n
interference.\n<\/p>\n
     8. Then the only question is regarding the<\/p>\n
sentence. Section 3(1) of PDPP Act provides a<\/p>\n
sentence of imprisonment for a term, which may<\/p>\n
extend to five years and fine. Though a minimum<\/p>\n
sentence of six months is provided for an offence<\/p>\n
under Section 3(2), no minimum sentence is provided<\/p>\n
for the offence under Section 3(1) of PDPP Act.<\/p>\n
CRRP 428\/02                7<\/span><\/p>\n
Learned Magistrate awarded rigorous imprisonment<\/p>\n
for three months for the offence under Section 3(1)<\/p>\n
of PDPP Act. The incident was in 1991. First<\/p>\n
petitioner was then aged about sixty years. It was<\/p>\n
about two decades back. Considering the entire<\/p>\n
facts and circumstances of the case, interest of<\/p>\n
justice will be met, if the sentence is modified to<\/p>\n
imprisonment till rising of court and a fine of<\/p>\n
Rs.5,000\/- and in default, simple imprisonment for<\/p>\n
one month for the offence under Section 3(1) of<\/p>\n
PDPP     Act.  Learned  Magistrate   awarded  simple<\/p>\n
imprisonment for one month for the offence under<\/p>\n
Section 447 of Indian Penal Code. Considering the<\/p>\n
entire     facts  and  circumstances  of  the  case,<\/p>\n
interest of justice will be met, if the sentence is<\/p>\n
modified    to  the  maximum  fine  provided for  an<\/p>\n
offence under Section 447 of Indian Penal Code.<\/p>\n
Learned     Magistrate  has  not   awarded  separate<\/p>\n
sentence for the offence under Section 427 of<\/p>\n
Indian Penal Code, which was not challenged by the<\/p>\n
CRRP 428\/02              8<\/span><\/p>\n
State. In such circumstances, in a revision, filed<\/p>\n
by the accused, no sentence could be awarded for<\/p>\n
the offence under Section 427 of Indian Penal Code,<\/p>\n
when no sentence was awarded by the trial court.<\/p>\n
     Revision is allowed in part. Conviction of<\/p>\n
petitioners 2 to 4\/accused 2 to 4 in C.C.No.<\/p>\n
356\/1993, as confirmed by Additional Sessions Judge<\/p>\n
in Crl.A.No.14\/1997 is set aside. They are found<\/p>\n
not guilty of the offences. They are acquitted.<\/p>\n
Conviction of the first petitioner for the offences<\/p>\n
under Sections 447 and 427 of Indian Penal Code and<\/p>\n
Section 3(1) of PDPP Act is confirmed. Sentence is<\/p>\n
modified. In supersession of the sentence awarded<\/p>\n
by the Magistrate and confirmed by the Additional<\/p>\n
Sessions Judge, first petitioner\/first accused is<\/p>\n
sentenced to imprisonment till rising of court and<\/p>\n
a fine of Rs.5,000\/- (Rupees Five thousand only)<\/p>\n
and in default, simple imprisonment for one month<\/p>\n
for the offence under Section 3(1) of PDPP Act. He<\/p>\n
is also sentenced to a fine of Rs.500\/-(Rupees Five<\/p>\n
CRRP 428\/02              9<\/span><\/p>\n
hundred only) and in default, simple imprisonment<\/p>\n
for fifteen days for the offence under Section 447<\/p>\n
of Indian Penal Code. First petitioner is directed<\/p>\n
to appear before Judicial First Class Magistrate,<\/p>\n
Vaikom on 07.09.2010. The Magistrate is directed to<\/p>\n
execute the sentence.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n11th August, 2010     (M.Sasidharan Nambiar, Judge)\n\ntkv\/vps\n\nCRRP 428\/02    10\n\n\n\n\n                M.Sasidharan Nambiar, J.\n\n               --------------------------\n\n                 Crl.R.P.No.428 of 2002\n\n               --------------------------\n\n                          ORDER\n\n\n\n                     11th August, 2010\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Madhu vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 428 of 2002() 1. MADHU, S\/O.MADHAVAN BHATTATHIRI, … Petitioner 2. SUNIL, S\/O.MADHU, KANMANI BHAVAN, 3. ANIL, S\/O.MADHU, KANMANI BHAVAN, 4. PRAVEEN @ KANNAN, KANMANI BHAVAN, Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE … […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-137406","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMadhu vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Madhu vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-21T18:49:53+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\\\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Madhu vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-21T18:49:53+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1272,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010\",\"name\":\"Madhu vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-21T18:49:53+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Madhu vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Madhu vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Madhu vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-21T18:49:53+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\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Madhu vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-21T18:49:53+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010"},"wordCount":1272,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010","name":"Madhu vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-21T18:49:53+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/madhu-vs-state-of-kerala-on-11-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Madhu vs State Of Kerala on 11 August, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/137406","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=137406"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/137406\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=137406"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=137406"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=137406"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}