{"id":140705,"date":"2010-01-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010"},"modified":"2015-07-31T21:23:13","modified_gmt":"2015-07-31T15:53:13","slug":"ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010","title":{"rendered":"Ratiyabhai vs We on 22 January, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Ratiyabhai vs We on 22 January, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A.L.Dave,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Ms.Justice H.N.Devani,&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\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/1649\/2004\t 1\/ 8\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 1649 of 2004\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \n\n\n \n\n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE\n \n\n  \nHONOURABLE\nMS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI  \n \n\n\n \n\n \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo\n\t\t\tbe referred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\nRATIYABHAI\nKAGALIYABHAI GAMIT - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT &amp; 1 - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================\n \nAppearance : \nMS\nSADHANA SAGAR for\nAppellant(s) : 1, \nMR LB DABHI, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for\nOpponent(s) : 1, \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.L.DAVE\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 22\/01\/2010 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)<\/p>\n<p>By<br \/>\n\tthis appeal, the appellant challenges the judgement and order<br \/>\n\trendered by the Sessions Court, Surat, at Vyara, in Sessions Case<br \/>\n\tNo.13 of 2004 dated 15th September 2004.  The appellant<br \/>\n\tcame to be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of<br \/>\n\tthe Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for<br \/>\n\tlife and to pay fine of Rs.500\/-, in default, to undergo rigorous<br \/>\n\timprisonment for one month.  He was charged for an offence<br \/>\n\tpunishable under Section 506(2) of IPC, for which he came to be<br \/>\n\tacquitted by the impugned judgement and order.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tcase against the appellant is that he committed murder of Vastupal<br \/>\n\tBudhiyabhai Gamit on 27th June 2003 at about 11:45 a.m.<br \/>\n\tin the outskirts of village Sadadun. He is alleged to have committed<br \/>\n\tmurder of the victim by inflicting an axe blow on the head of the<br \/>\n\tvictim.  The motive attributed is a dispute regarding land.  It is<br \/>\n\talleged that the appellant nurtured a feeling that the good land had<br \/>\n\tgone to the share of the victim.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tincident was seen by Meeraben, Nurjiben and Kantubhai, who are all<br \/>\n\texamined as PW 1, PW-2 and PW-3 respectively.  Meeraben lodged the<br \/>\n\tFIR with Songadh Police Station, on the basis of which the offence<br \/>\n\twas registered and case investigated.  The police having found<br \/>\n\tsufficient material, lodged a chargesheet in the Court of the<br \/>\n\tJudicial Magistrate First Class, Vyara, who in turn, committed the<br \/>\n\tcase to the Court of Sessions and Sessions Case No.13 of 2004 came<br \/>\n\tto be registered.\n<\/p>\n<p>Charge<br \/>\n\twas framed against the accused at exh.5, to which he pleaded not<br \/>\n\tguilty and claimed to be tried. After considering the evidence, the<br \/>\n\tTrial Court found that the prosecution was successful in proving the<br \/>\n\tcase against the accused and therefore, recorded conviction and<br \/>\n\thence, this appeal by the accused convict.\n<\/p>\n<p>We<br \/>\n\thave heard learned advocate Ms.Sadhna Sagar for the appellant and<br \/>\n\tlearned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.L.B.Dabhi for the respondent<br \/>\n\tState.\n<\/p>\n<p>According<br \/>\n\tto learned advocate Ms.Sagar, the prosecution evidence is<br \/>\n\tinconsistent.  She submitted that the medical evidence is not<br \/>\n\tproduced to support the prosecution case that treatment was given to<br \/>\n\tthe victim.  Had the victim received some treatment, probably he<br \/>\n\tcould have survived.  Ms.Sagar submitted that the witnesses are all<br \/>\n\trelatives and they have a bias against the accused and cannot be<br \/>\n\tconsidered as truthful witnesses.  The appeal, therefore, be<br \/>\n\tallowed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Learned<br \/>\n\tAdditional Public Prosecutor Mr.Dabhi, on the other hand, opposed<br \/>\n\tthis appeal.  He has taken us through the evidence of eye-witnesses<br \/>\n\tMeeraben, Nurjiben and Kantubhai, PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3 respectively,<br \/>\n\tand submitted that the evidence of these witnesses is consistent and<br \/>\n\tcogent.  That they being relatives, their presence at the place of<br \/>\n\tincident is natural.  The witnesses also happened to be the close<br \/>\n\trelatives of the victim and therefore, there is no reason to<br \/>\n\tdisbelieve their versions.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.Dabhi<br \/>\n\tsubmitted that though single blow injury is caused to the deceased<br \/>\n\tby the appellant, the injury is caused with such a force and has<br \/>\n\tresulted into grave impact that the death occurred almost<br \/>\n\timmediately.\n<\/p>\n<p>PW-1<br \/>\n\tMeeraben is examined at exh.10.  She is the wife of victim &#8211;<br \/>\n\tVastupal Budhiyabhai.  She states that she and her husband had gone<br \/>\n\tto the field for sowing maize.  At about 11.00 a.m., her mother<br \/>\n\tin-law Nurjiben came. They, therefore, had a recess from work.  She<br \/>\n\tsays that at that time, the accused came there and raised a dispute<br \/>\n\tabout land saying that he is given less land and then, the accused<br \/>\n\tinflicted a blow with an axe on the victim, who fell to the ground.<br \/>\n\tThe witness says that then the accused intimidated them.  She says<br \/>\n\tthat her mother-in-law had taken her husband in her lap and she was<br \/>\n\talso assaulted upon, however, she has not suffered any injury.  The<br \/>\n\tassailant   accused thereafter escaped along with axe.  The<br \/>\n\twitness has been cross-examined about the scene of offence.  She is<br \/>\n\talso cross-examined on the question of knowledge of Gujarati.  She<br \/>\n\tstates that she went to Songadh Police Station along with her mother<br \/>\n\tin-law and admits that she does not know the contents of the FIR.<br \/>\n\tShe says that she narrated the incident in Gamit dialect, which was<br \/>\n\twritten down by the police in Gujarati.  She admits that her clothes<br \/>\n\twere stained with blood as her husband was bleeding profusely.  The<br \/>\n\twitness denies the suggestion that she is not telling the truth<br \/>\n\tabout the occurrence and is wrongly implicating the accused<br \/>\n\tappellant.  Many questions are put to the witness regarding<br \/>\n\ttopography of the place of incident, but nothing turns out of it.\n<\/p>\n<p>Witness<br \/>\n\tNurjiben Budhiyabhai Gamit is examined at exh.12.  She is also an<br \/>\n\teye-witness.  She says that PW-1 Meeraben and she were in the field.<br \/>\n\t At that time, the accused appellant came to their field and<br \/>\n\tinflicted an axe blow on the left occipital region of her son<br \/>\n\tVastupal.  She, therefore, intervened, but the accused also wielded<br \/>\n\ta blow on her, however, she moved aside and could avoid the blow.<br \/>\n\tKantubhai and Rekiyabhai also came there on hearing the shouts.<br \/>\n\tVictim Vastupal had fallen to the ground and was bleeding from head.<br \/>\n\t The accused assaulted on the ground that why he is being given less<br \/>\n\tshare.  The witness says that she cannot say with certainty that the<br \/>\n\tmuddamal axe was the very same axe which was used by the accused in<br \/>\n\tcommission of the offence as the accused was wielding the same.\n<\/p>\n<p>(10.1)\tThe<br \/>\n\twitness has been cross-examined and she denies the suggestion that<br \/>\n\tbefore she could reach the field, the incident was over.  She also<br \/>\n\tdenies the suggestion that she had not seen the occurrence and that<br \/>\n\tshe is falsely implicating the accused appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>(10.2)\tWitness<br \/>\n\tKantubhai Kagadiyabhai Gamit is examined at exh.13.  He also deposes<br \/>\n\ton same line.  He also did not identify the muddamal axe with<br \/>\n\tcertainty on the same ground that the accused was running with the<br \/>\n\taxe in his hand.  During his cross-examination, the suggestions that<br \/>\n\the has seen the incident and is falsely implicating the accused<br \/>\n\tappellant, are flatly denied by him.\n<\/p>\n<p>Witness<br \/>\n\tRekiyabhai Nendadabhai Gamit is examined at exh.14.   He says that<br \/>\n\ton hearing the shouts, he went towards the field to find that<br \/>\n\tRatiyabhai was running with an axe in his hand.  He says that he had<br \/>\n\tnoticed an axe in the hand of the accused   appellant.  He<br \/>\n\tidentified the muddamal article No.3 to be the same as the weapon<br \/>\n\tthe accused had in his hand.  During cross-examination, again stock<br \/>\n\tsuggestions are put which are denied by the witness.\n<\/p>\n<p>What<br \/>\n\temerges from the above stated evidence is that the incident was seen<br \/>\n\tby as many as four eye witnesses, whose presence at the place was<br \/>\n\tnatural.  They have denied the suggestion that they were not there.<br \/>\n\tThat apart, their version about how the incident occurred is<br \/>\n\tconsistent.  All of them say that the accused   appellant went to<br \/>\n\tthe field of the victim and quarreled with him on the ground that<br \/>\n\twhy he is being provided with less share and then, inflicted the axe<br \/>\n\tblow on the left occipital region of the victim.  Thus, the<br \/>\n\tappellant was the aggressor who went to the field of the victim.<br \/>\n\tThere he picked up the quarrel and assaulted the victim with an axe,<br \/>\n\twhich was in his hand from the very beginning.  It is true that<br \/>\n\tthere was some dispute between the accused and the victim about<br \/>\n\tsharing the property, but at the time of occurrence, no ground for<br \/>\n\tany provocation was provided to the accused by the victim.  The<br \/>\n\taccused had no reason to go to the field of the appellant,<br \/>\n\tparticularly with an axe.  Still he goes there, picks up a quarrel<br \/>\n\tand then assaults the deceased.  Although the blow is one, the seat<br \/>\n\tof injury and the force with which the injury is caused would speak<br \/>\n\tof a clear intention to cause death of the deceased.  The case does<br \/>\n\tnot fall and cannot fall within any of the exceptions to Section 300<br \/>\n\tof IPC.  We find that the witnesses have told the truth to the<br \/>\n\tCourt.  The two lady witnesses have said that they cannot identify<br \/>\n\tthe weapon as it was being wielded, otherwise they could have very<br \/>\n\twell said that they can identify and could have identified the<br \/>\n\tmuddamal weapon that being the only weapon in the case.  In this set<br \/>\n\tof circumstances, the evidence which is adduced by the prosecution,<br \/>\n\thas rightly been accepted by the Trial Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>(12.1)\tThe<br \/>\n\tmedical evidence also indicates that, in post-mortem note exh.26,<br \/>\n\twhile recording external injuries, the doctor recorded presence of<br \/>\n\tchop wound over left side of face passing through middle of first<br \/>\n\tear separating it into two halves.  The medical opinion was that the<br \/>\n\tdeath was outcome of the injury to left internal jugular vein<br \/>\n\tfollowing injury by sharp and heavy weapon.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tTrial Court, therefore, was justified in convicting the appellant.<br \/>\n\tNo interference is called for in the judgement and finding of the<br \/>\n\tTrial court in exercise of appellate jurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tappeal, therefore, must fail.  Stands rejected.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t[A.L.DAVE,<br \/>\nJ.]<\/p>\n<p>[HARSHA<br \/>\nDEVANI, J.]<\/p>\n<p>parmar*<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Ratiyabhai vs We on 22 January, 2010 Author: A.L.Dave,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Ms.Justice H.N.Devani,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/1649\/2004 1\/ 8 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1649 of 2004 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI ========================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local [&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-140705","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>Ratiyabhai vs We on 22 January, 2010 - 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\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ratiyabhai vs We on 22 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-01-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-07-31T15:53:13+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ratiyabhai vs We on 22 January, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-31T15:53:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1542,\"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\\\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010\",\"name\":\"Ratiyabhai vs We on 22 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-31T15:53:13+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ratiyabhai vs We on 22 January, 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":"Ratiyabhai vs We on 22 January, 2010 - 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\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ratiyabhai vs We on 22 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-01-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-07-31T15:53:13+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ratiyabhai vs We on 22 January, 2010","datePublished":"2010-01-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-31T15:53:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010"},"wordCount":1542,"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\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010","name":"Ratiyabhai vs We on 22 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-01-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-31T15:53:13+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ratiyabhai-vs-we-on-22-january-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ratiyabhai vs We on 22 January, 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\/140705","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=140705"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/140705\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=140705"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=140705"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=140705"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}