{"id":139814,"date":"2010-07-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-07-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2"},"modified":"2016-08-29T16:08:39","modified_gmt":"2016-08-29T10:38:39","slug":"appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2","title":{"rendered":"Appearance : vs Unknown on 28 July, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Appearance : vs Unknown on 28 July, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: A.M.Kapadia,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice J.C.Upadhyaya,&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\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.MA\/1612\/2010\t 4\/ 8\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nMISC.APPLICATION No. 1612 of 2010\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 297 of 2010\n \n\n \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT \n\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nJAGUBHA\nNAVUBHA @ NAVALSINH JADEJA & 2 \n\n \n\n=========================================\n \nAppearance : \nMR.\nL.B.DABHI, APP for Applicant(s) : 1, \nNone\nfor Respondent(s) : 1 - 3. \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\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\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\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 28\/07\/2010 \n\n \n\n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n
(Per
\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA)<\/p>\n
By
\n\tmeans of filing this Application under Section 378 (1)(3) of the
\n\tCode of Criminal Procedure ( the Code  for short), the Applicant
\n\t  State of Gujarat has prayed to grant leave to file Criminal
\n\tAppeal No. 297 of 2009, which is directed against the judgment and
\n\torder dated 17.11.2009 rendered in Sessions Case No. 24 of 2007 by
\n\tthe learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.3, Morbi,
\n\trecording acquittal of the Respondents   accused of the offences
\n\tpunishable under Sections 323, 504, 506(2) read with Section 114 of
\n\tthe Indian Penal Code ( the Code  for short) and Section
\n\t3(1)(10)(15) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
\n\t(Prevention of Atrocities) Act ( Atrocity Act  for short).\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tprosecution case as disclosed in the FIR and unfolded during trial
\n\twas that;\n<\/p>\n
2.1\tThe
\n\tfirst informant Hansdevbhai Ramjibhai lodged FIR against the
\n\tRespondents   accused to the effect that on 16.4.2007, the
\n\tRespondents   accused Nos.1 and 2, namely Jagubha Navubha and
\n\tKuldeepsinh Kishorsinh Jadeja respectively came near his house and
\n\tthey threatened the complainant on the issue of agricultural labour
\n\twork and was beaten by those two accused.  It is further alleged
\n\tthat on 29.4.2007, again those two accused along with Respondent No.
\n\t3   Sahdevsinh Navalsinh Jadeja came near his house and he was
\n\tabused and beaten by kick and fist blows and he was threatened as
\n\twell as he was insulted in his caste name.  On 30.5.2007, the
\n\tcomplainant lodged the FIR regarding the incident.\n<\/p>\n
2.2\tDuring
\n\tthe course of investigation, statements of material witnesses were
\n\trecorded, necessary panchnamas were drawn in presence of panchas,
\n\tRespondents   accused came to be arrested, required documents like
\n\tcaste certificate of the complainant, etc. were collected.  After
\n\tthe police collected required material for the purpose of lodgment
\n\tof charge sheet, charge sheet came to be filed in the Court of
\n\tlearned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Maliya.  Since the offence
\n\tunder the Atrocity Act is exclusively triable by the Special Court,
\n\tthe learned JMFC committed the case to the Special Court, Morbi at
\n\tRajkot, which was registered as Special (Atrocity) Case No.24 of
\n\t2007.\n<\/p>\n
2.3\tThe
\n\ttrial Court framed charge against the three accused to which they
\n\tdid not plead guilty and claimed to be tried.  Thereupon, the
\n\tprosecution examined 9 witnesses and produced 10 documents detailed
\n\tin paragraphs 5 and 6 respectively in the impugned judgment and
\n\torder.  After the prosecution concluded its evidence, the trial
\n\tCourt recorded further statements of the three accused persons under
\n\tSection 313 of the Code and the accused in their further statements
\n\tdenied generally all the incriminating circumstances brought to
\n\ttheir notice by the trial Court and stated that they were falsely
\n\timplicated in this case.  After appreciating, analyzing and
\n\tscrutinizing the oral and documentary evidence on record and the
\n\tsubmissions made on behalf of both the sides, the trial Court came
\n\tto be conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove its case
\n\tbeyond reasonable doubt and recorded the acquittal of the
\n\tRespondents accused.\n<\/p>\n
\tWe have
\n\tconsidered the submissions advanced by Mr. L.B.Dabhi, learned APP
\n\tfor the Applicant   State of Gujarat, we have perused the impugned
\n\tjudgment and order, and the set of evidence supplied by him during
\n\tthe course of his submission so also the record and proceedings of
\n\tSpecial (Atrocity) Case No. 24 of 2007 called for by us from the
\n\ttrial Court vide order dated 7.7.2010. This Court has also
\n\tundertaken a complete and comprehensive appreciation of all vital
\n\tfeatures of the case and the entire evidence on record with
\n\treference to broad and reasonable probabilities of the case.\n<\/p>\n
Considering
\n\tthe oral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution in this
\n\tcase, it is clear that the complainant alleged two different
\n\tincidents, namely the incident dated 16.4.2007 wherein, according to
\n\thim he was threatened and was abused and beaten by Respondent
\n\tAccused Nos. 1 and 2.  The second incident as alleged is dated
\n\t29.4.2007 and according to the complainant, at that time he was
\n\tbeaten by all the three Respondents   accused and that he was
\n\tinsulted in his caste name.  The complainant did not lodge any FIR
\n\tsoon after the first incident or soon after the second incident,
\n\tbut, clubbing both the incidents together, he lodged the FIR on
\n\t30.5.2007.  Thus, the FIR was suspiciously belated, neither in the
\n\tFIR nor in the evidence of first informant   Hansdevbhai Ramjibhai
\n\t  PW-1 recorded at exh.6,  he explained the delay in lodgment of
\n\tthe FIR.  The trial Court further observed that despite the fact
\n\tthat the complainant alleged that he was beaten by the Respondents
\n\taccused, no medical treatment was taken by him and there was no
\n\tmedical evidence on record.  About the caste certificate, the trial
\n\tCourt observed that the prosecution failed to prove the caste
\n\tcertificate of the complainant.  The trial Court further observed
\n\tthat assuming that the caste certificate is proved, yet, the
\n\tevidence of first informant   Hansdevbhai Ramjibhai and the
\n\tevidence of other witnesses examined by the prosecution in support
\n\tof the evidence of the first informant was not such which would
\n\tinspire confidence in the mind of the Court.  The evidence was found
\n\tto be of material improvements, omissions and contradictory in
\n\tmaterial particulars.  One of the witnesses turned hostile.  The
\n\tcomplainant alleged that because of the threat administered to him
\n\tby the Respondents   accused, he had to leave the village and had
\n\tto stay in Morbi.  About such allegation, the evidence revealed that
\n\tson of the complainant was serving at Morbi and therefore the
\n\tcomplainant went to Morbi to stay with his son.  The trial Court, in
\n\tthe impugned judgment, analyzing the evidence on record, further
\n\tobserved that the investigation was not carried on by the competent
\n\tofficer as provided in the statute.\n<\/p>\n
On
\n\toverall  view of the matter, the trial Court ultimately came to the
\n\tconclusion that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond any
\n\treasonable doubt.  The prosecution has not been able to bring home
\n\tthe charge levelled against the accused persons and their complicity
\n\tcannot be said to have been established as there was no cogent and
\n\tconvincing evidence against the accused persons to connect them with
\n\tthe alleged crime.\n<\/p>\n
\tIn view of
\n\tthe unsatisfactory evidence led by the prosecution, we are of the
\n\tconsidered opinion that no illegality or infirmity has been
\n\tcommitted by the trial Court in acquitting the accused persons of
\n\tthe offences with which they were charged.  We find ourselves in
\n\tcomplete agreement with the ultimate conclusion and the resultant
\n\torder of acquittal, as, in our view, no other conclusion was
\n\tpossible except the one reached by the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n
This
\n\tis an acquittal appeal. The principles which would govern and
\n\tregulate the hearing of appeal by the High Court against an order of
\n\tacquittal passed by the Trial Court have been very succinctly
\n\texplained by the Supreme Court in the matter of  AJIT SAVANT
\n\tMAJAGAVI VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA, reported in AIR 1997
\n\tp.3255.\n<\/p>\n
(a)
\n\tIn an appeal against an order of acquittal, the High Court possesses
\n\tall the powers, and nothing less than the powers it possesses while
\n\thearing an appeal against an order of conviction.\n<\/p>\n
(b)
\n\tThe High Court has the power to reconsider the whole issue,
\n\treappraise the evidence and come to its own conclusion and findings
\n\tin place of the findings recorded by trial court, if the said
\n\tfindings are against the weight of the evidence on record, or in
\n\tother words, perverse.\n<\/p>\n
(c)
\n\tBefore reversing the finding of acquittal, the High Court has to
\n\tconsider each ground on which the order of acquittal was based and
\n\tto record its own reasons for not accepting those grounds not
\n\tsubscribing to the view expressed by the trial Court that the
\n\taccused is entitled to acquittal.\n<\/p>\n
(d)
\n\tIn reversing the finding of acquittal, the High Court has to keep in
\n\tview the fact that the presumption of innocence is still available
\n\tin favour of the accused and the same stands fortified and
\n\tstrengthened by the order of acquittal passed in his favour by the
\n\ttrial Court.\n<\/p>\n
(e)
\n\tIf the High Court, on a fresh scrutiny and reappraised of the
\n\tevidence and other material on record, is of the opinion that there
\n\tis another view which can be reasonably taken, then the view which
\n\tfavours the accused should be adopted.\n<\/p>\n
(f)
\n\tThe High Court has also to keep in mind that the trial Court had the
\n\tadvantage of looking at the demeanour of witnesses and observing
\n\ttheir conduct in the Court, especially in the witness box.\n<\/p>\n
(g)
\n\tThe High Court has also to keep in mind that even at that stage, the
\n\taccused was entitled to benefit of doubt. The doubt should be such
\n\tas a reasonable person would honestly and conscientiously entertain
\n\tas to the guilt of the accused.\n<\/p>\n
In
\n\t ANOKH SINGH vs. STATE OF PUNJAB,<\/a> reported in AIR 1992
\n\tSC p.598, Supreme Court has held that in an appeal against
\n\tacquittal, the High Court should attach greater weight to
\n\tappreciation of evidence by the Trial Judge who had the occasion to
\n\twatch the demeanour of the witnesses.\n<\/p>\n
It
\n\tis a cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that in an
\n\tacquittal appeal if  other view is  possible then also appellate
\n\tCourt cannot substitute its own view by reversing the acquittal into
\n\t conviction, unless  the  findings  of  the trial Court are
\n\tperverse,  contrary to  the  material on  record, palpably  wrong,
\n\tmanifestly erroneous or demonstrably unsustainable.  (See  Ramesh
\n\tBabulal Doshi  V. State of Gujarat<\/a> (1996) 9 SCC 225).  In the
\n\tinstant case, the learned APP has not been able  to  point out to us
\n\tas to how the findings recorded  by the trial Court are perverse,
\n\tcontrary  to material on record, palpably wrong, manifestly
\n\terroneous  or demonstrably unsustainable.\n<\/p>\n
On
\n\toverall appreciation of evidence,  this Court is  satisfied  that
\n\tthere is no infirmity in the reasons assigned  by  the trial Court
\n\tfor acquitting the accused persons.  Suffice it to say that the
\n\ttrial Court has given cogent and convincing  reasons  for
\n\tacquitting the accused persons and the learned A.P.P. has  failed to
\n\tdislodge the reasons given by the trial Court and  convince  this
\n\tCourt  to take  a  view contrary to the one taken by the trial
\n\tCourt.\n<\/p>\n
Seen
\n\t in  the  above  context, we do not find any valid reason or
\n\tjustifiable ground to interfere with the impugned  judgment
\n\tand order acquitting the accused persons of the offences with  which
\n\t they were  charged.\n<\/p>\n
For
\n\tthe foregoing reasons, the application fails and accordingly it is
\n\trejected.  Resultantly, leave to appeal is refused, and as a
\n\tconsequence thereof, Criminal Appeal no. 297 of 2010 is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
(A.M.\n<\/p>\n
Kapadia, J.)<\/p>\n
(J.C.Upadhyaya,
\nJ.)<\/p>\n
\tJayanti*<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Appearance : vs Unknown on 28 July, 2010 Author: A.M.Kapadia,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice J.C.Upadhyaya,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.MA\/1612\/2010 4\/ 8 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 1612 of 2010 In CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 297 of 2010 ========================================= STATE OF GUJARAT Versus JAGUBHA NAVUBHA @ […]<\/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-139814","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAppearance : vs Unknown on 28 July, 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\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Appearance : vs Unknown on 28 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2\" \/>\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=\"2010-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-29T10:38:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Appearance : vs Unknown on 28 July, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-29T10:38:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2\"},\"wordCount\":1759,\"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\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2\",\"name\":\"Appearance : vs Unknown on 28 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-07-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-29T10:38:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Appearance : vs Unknown on 28 July, 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":"Appearance : vs Unknown on 28 July, 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\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Appearance : vs Unknown on 28 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-29T10:38:39+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Appearance : vs Unknown on 28 July, 2010","datePublished":"2010-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-29T10:38:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2"},"wordCount":1759,"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\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2","name":"Appearance : vs Unknown on 28 July, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-07-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-29T10:38:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-unknown-on-28-july-2010-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Appearance : vs Unknown on 28 July, 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\/139814","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=139814"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/139814\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=139814"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=139814"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=139814"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}