{"id":158504,"date":"2008-09-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008"},"modified":"2018-08-09T08:16:27","modified_gmt":"2018-08-09T02:46:27","slug":"mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Mekaram vs State on 25 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Mekaram vs State on 25 September, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A.L.Dave,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice J.C.Upadhyaya,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/2423\/2005\t 7\/ 9\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. 2423 of 2005\n \n\nwith\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nMISC. APPLICATION No. 8995 of 2007\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE \n\n \n\n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA\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 be\n\t\t\treferred 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\nMEKARAM\nBHERARAM BISHNOI - Appellant\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT ?  Respondent.\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nRAJESH M AGRAWAL for\nAppellant. \nMR UR BHATT, APP, for\nRespondent. \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\tMR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 25\/09\/2008 \n\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)<\/p>\n<p>\tThe<br \/>\nappellant challenges the judgment and order rendered by the learned<br \/>\nPresiding Officer, FTC No.2, Bhavnagar, on 30.9.2005, in Special<br \/>\n(NDPS) Case No.11\/2005, convicting the appellant for the offences<br \/>\npunishable under Sections 17 &amp; 29  of the Narcotic Drugs and<br \/>\nPsychotropic Substances Act,1985 [?SNDPS Act?? for short] and<br \/>\nsentencing the appellant to undergo R.I. for a period of ten years<br \/>\nand to pay a fine of Rs.1 Lac, in default, to undergo R.I. for 3<br \/>\nyears.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe<br \/>\nbrief facts of the case are that the investigating agency arrested<br \/>\nthe appellant-accused in connection with possession of contraband<br \/>\nopium weighing 950 grams on<br \/>\n1.3.2005. After search, the muddamal was seized by drawing a<br \/>\npanchnama in presence of panch-witnesses. The samples were also drawn<br \/>\nthereunder and sent to F.S.L. for analysis. The samples were<br \/>\nanalysised and F.S.L. Report indicated that the material seized was<br \/>\nopium. On the basis of<br \/>\nthat report, charge<br \/>\nsheet was filed against the accused-appellant and the case was<br \/>\nnumbered as Spl. (NDPS) Case No.11\/2005 before the Presiding Officer,<br \/>\nFTC No.2, Bhavnagar.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.1\t\tAfter<br \/>\nconsidering the evidence led before it, the trial Court came to the<br \/>\nconclusion that the prosecution was successful in establishing the<br \/>\ncharge levelled against the appellant and recorded conviction and<br \/>\nimposed sentence, as stated hereinabove.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tWe<br \/>\nhave heard learned advocate Mr.Agrawal for the appellant, and learned<br \/>\nA.P.P. Mr.U.R.Bhatt for the State. We have also perused the record<br \/>\nand proceedings.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tThe<br \/>\nlearned advocate for the appellant submitted that apart from other<br \/>\ndiscrepancies, the case of the prosecution ought to have failed<br \/>\nbefore the trial Court only on account of defect in the sealing<br \/>\nprocedure adopted by the investigating agency at the time of seizure<br \/>\nand sampling. He submitted that seizure and sampling would go to the<br \/>\nroot of the entire case and, therefore, other defects would be in<br \/>\naddition to the major defect of sealing and sampling. The learned<br \/>\nadvocate submitted that while sealing the contraband seized and<br \/>\nsamples drawn therefrom, the investigating agency has not affixed the<br \/>\nslip\/s signed by the panch-witnesses on the outer cover of the<br \/>\npackets, but, has placed the slip\/s inside the seized muddamal packet<br \/>\nor the samples drawn therefrom. This would leave room for tampering<br \/>\nwith the muddamal seized because, without any dispute, the seal<br \/>\naffixed is that of the Investigating Officer. He, therefore,<br \/>\nsubmitted that the trial Court ought to have given benefit to the<br \/>\naccused-appellant and acquitted him. He submitted that this Court has<br \/>\ntaken similar view in a number of cases. He relied on the following<br \/>\ndecisions;\n<\/p>\n<p>(i)<br \/>\nCriminal Appeal No.323 of 1996 [Jitendra @ Sanjaykumar Suryakant<br \/>\nDesai vs. State of Gujarat] decided on 17.8.2001 [Coram: B.C.Patel &amp;<br \/>\nA.L.Dave,JJ.]<\/p>\n<p>(ii)<br \/>\nCriminal Appeal No.287 of 1999 [Ganpatram Punmaram Vishnoi v. State<br \/>\nof Gujarat] decided on 7.5.2002 [Kshitij R. Vyas &amp; Ravi R.<br \/>\nTripathi,JJ.]<\/p>\n<p>(iii)<br \/>\nNavinkumar @ Shambhuprasad @ Bapji Chimanlal Vyas v. State of<br \/>\nGujarat, 2006(1) GLH 409, wherein the above unreported judgments have<br \/>\nbeen referred to and relied on.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iv)<br \/>\nSohanlal Kasiram Brahmin &amp; Anr. v. State of Gujarat &amp; Anr.<br \/>\n2007(1) GLH 131.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tThe<br \/>\nlearned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tWe<br \/>\nhave considered the rival side submissions.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tOn<br \/>\nperusal of the record, we find that the panchnama drawn at the time<br \/>\nof seizure and drawing of sample clearly indicates that the slips<br \/>\nsigned by the panch-witnesses were placed into the packet containing<br \/>\nthe contraband article, or the samples drawn therefrom. Thereafter<br \/>\nthe packet was sealed, tied with a thread and wax-seal of the<br \/>\nInvestigating Officer was affixed. This is reflected in the F.S.L.<br \/>\nReport as well. The FIR also indicates the same situation.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.1\t\tLearned<br \/>\nA.P.P. Mr.Bhatt does not dispute the above factual aspect regarding<br \/>\nslip being inside the cover and not affixed on the cover below the<br \/>\nwax-seal.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tIn<br \/>\nour opinion, the contention regarding laxity in following the<br \/>\nprocedure relating to sealing of the seized contraband article has<br \/>\nsome substance. It is clear from the panchnama (Exh.8), FIR (Exh.19)<br \/>\nand FSL report (Exh.26), so also the deposition of the raiding<br \/>\nofficer (Exh.18) that the correct procedure for sealing has not been<br \/>\nfollowed to rule out the possibility of tampering with the contraband<br \/>\narticle seized or samples drawn therefrom. It is found that after<br \/>\ndrawing the samples, at the time of sealing the samples as well as<br \/>\nthe remainder of the contraband seized, the slips containing<br \/>\nsignatures of the panch-witnesses and the police officer were placed<br \/>\ninside the packets and, therefore, the possibility of tampering with<br \/>\nthe muddamal at the later stage and then again resealing the same by<br \/>\nthe investigating agency, cannot be ruled out. The very purpose<br \/>\nbehind carrying out the search, taking of sample and sealing in<br \/>\npresence of panch-witnesses is to ensure that there is no scope for<br \/>\nany mischief in the procedure required to be followed. At the time of<br \/>\nsealing, slips containing signatures of panch-witnesses as well as<br \/>\nthe investigating officer are affixed on the articles seized and a<br \/>\nseal is applied over it, so that, in case of any attempt for<br \/>\ntampering with the article seized, the seal would be broken or the<br \/>\nslip would be torn, which would immediately reveal such an attempt.<br \/>\nIf the slip is put inside as was done in the instant case, the<br \/>\npossibility of tampering cannot be ruled out. Under the<br \/>\ncircumstances, the procedure followed for sealing in the instant case<br \/>\ncannot be said to be proper and free from any possibility of<br \/>\ntampering. The procedure, therefore, cannot be said to be beyond the<br \/>\nscope of any reasonable doubt and in that event, benefit must go to<br \/>\nthe accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tThis<br \/>\nCourt has taken similar view in (i) Criminal Appeal No. 323\/1996,\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii) Criminal Appeal No.287\/1999, (iii) Navinkumar @ Shambhuprasad @<br \/>\nBapji Chimanlal Vyas v. State of Gujarat, 2006(1) GLH 409, and (iv)<br \/>\nSohanlal Kasiram Brahmin &amp; Anr. vs. State of Gujarat, 2007(1) GLH\n<\/p>\n<p>131.<\/p>\n<p>10.\tSince<br \/>\nthe defect in sealing procedure while sealing the contraband article<br \/>\nor drawing samples therefrom would go to the root of the prosecution<br \/>\ncase and affect the investigation and the trial and since we have<br \/>\nfound such a defect in the procedure, we do not propose to deal with<br \/>\nthe other aspects of the appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tBeing<br \/>\nconscious about the menace of narcotic drugs and psychotropic<br \/>\nsubstance in the society, we only quote what has been observed by<br \/>\nthis Court in Criminal Appeal No.323\/1996, as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>?SIt<br \/>\ncannot be overlooked that society is facing the menace of drugs and<br \/>\npersons involved in such drugs need to be appropriately dealt with.<br \/>\nThe society needs to be protected from persons indulging in such<br \/>\nactivities. The Legislature has, for that purpose, enacted laws with<br \/>\nstringent arrangements. But for that purpose, the prescribed<br \/>\nprocedure has to be strictly followed by the Investigating Agency.<br \/>\nFailure on the part of the Investigating Agency may result in<br \/>\nnon-fulfilment of the purpose behind the enactments. The Apex Court,<br \/>\nin the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1438183\/\">State of Punjab v. Baldev Singh,<\/a> 1993(3) GLR 2483, in<br \/>\nparagraph 31, observed as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8217;31.\n<\/p>\n<p>There is indeed a need to protect society from criminals. The<br \/>\nsocietal intent in safety will suffer if persons who commit crimes<br \/>\nare let off because the evidence against them is to be treated as if<br \/>\nit does not exist. The answer, therefore, is that the investigating<br \/>\nagency must follow the procedure as envisaged by the statute<br \/>\nscrupulously and the failure to do so must be viewed by the higher<br \/>\nauthorities seriously inviting action against the officials<br \/>\nconcerned, so that the laxity on the part of the investigating<br \/>\nauthority is curbed.??\n<\/p>\n<p>\tWe<br \/>\nonly hope that the authorities concerned will take appropriate action<br \/>\nto avoid such eventualities, as in the instant case.??\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\tThe<br \/>\nappeal, therefore, would stand allowed. The judgment and order dated<br \/>\n30th September, 2005, rendered by the learned Presiding<br \/>\nOfficer, FTC No.2, Bhavnagar, in Spl.(NDPS) Case No.11\/2005 recording<br \/>\nconviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Sections<br \/>\n17 &amp; 29 of the NDPS Act is hereby set aside. The appellant is<br \/>\ndirected to be released from the prison forthwith, if not required in<br \/>\nany other case. The fine, if paid, shall be refunded.\n<\/p>\n<p> Criminal<br \/>\nMisc. Application No.8995\/2007<\/p>\n<p>\tSince<br \/>\nthe main appeal is disposed of, this application does not survive<br \/>\nand, therefore, stands disposed of accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>    \t\t[<br \/>\nA.L. Dave,J.]\t[ J.C.Upadhyaya,J.]<\/p>\n<p>(patel)<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Mekaram vs State on 25 September, 2008 Author: A.L.Dave,&amp;Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice J.C.Upadhyaya,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/2423\/2005 7\/ 9 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2423 of 2005 with CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION No. 8995 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE HONOURABLE [&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-158504","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>Mekaram vs State on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mekaram vs State on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-09T02:46:27+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\\\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mekaram vs State on 25 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-09T02:46:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1405,\"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\\\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Mekaram vs State on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-09T02:46:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mekaram vs State on 25 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mekaram vs State on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mekaram vs State on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-09T02:46:27+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\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mekaram vs State on 25 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-09T02:46:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008"},"wordCount":1405,"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\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008","name":"Mekaram vs State on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-09T02:46:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mekaram-vs-state-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mekaram vs State on 25 September, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/158504","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=158504"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/158504\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=158504"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=158504"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=158504"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}