{"id":161248,"date":"2002-09-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-09-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002"},"modified":"2016-08-31T08:59:05","modified_gmt":"2016-08-31T03:29:05","slug":"mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002","title":{"rendered":"Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr vs State Of A.P on 16 September, 2002"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr vs State Of A.P on 16 September, 2002<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S V Patil<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: U.C. Bannerjee, Shivaraj V. Patil.<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (crl.) 871 of 1996\nPETITIONER:\nMohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr.\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nState of A.P.\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t16, 201902BENCH:\nU.C. BANNERJEE &amp;SHIVARAJ V. PATIL.\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n<p>Shivaraj V. Patil J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt is yet another unfortunate case of a young girl<br \/>\nof 18 years whose all hopes and aspirations to live a<br \/>\nhappy married life were burnt and destroyed by the burn<br \/>\ninjuries caused by herself to end her life when the<br \/>\nappellants subjected her to cruelty and abated the<br \/>\ncommission of suicide by her within 11 months after<br \/>\nmarriage.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe appellants were tried for offences under<br \/>\nSections 304-B, 306 and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.<br \/>\nThe learned Sessions Judge, after trial acquitted them<br \/>\nof all the charges giving benefit of doubt.  On appeal,<br \/>\nthe High Court while confirming the order of acquittal<br \/>\nunder Section 304-B of the IPC, set aside the order of<br \/>\nacquittal recorded under Sections 306 and 498-A and<br \/>\nconvicted and sentenced them for two years&#8217; rigorous<br \/>\nimprisonment each for the said offences making the<br \/>\nsentences to run concurrently.\tThus, aggrieved by this<br \/>\njudgment and order of the High Court, the appellants<br \/>\nhave filed this appeal before this Court.  The State<br \/>\nhas not filed any appeal against the order of the High<br \/>\nCourt confirming the order acquitting the appellants<br \/>\nfor the offence under Section 304-B IPC.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe prosecution case as projected during the trial<br \/>\nis that the appellant No.1 is the son of the appellant<br \/>\nNo. 2.\tThe deceased Razwana Parveen was married to the<br \/>\nappellant No. 1 on 26.4.1987.\tMohammed Allauddin Asir<br \/>\nMansoori (PW-3), Allauddin Mansoori (PW.4), and Rahman<br \/>\nBee (PW.5) are the brother, father and the mother of<br \/>\nthe deceased respectively.  On 9.3.1988 at about 9.30<br \/>\nP.M., the deceased sustained burn injuries in the house<br \/>\nof the appellants where she was living.\t She was<br \/>\nshifted to Osmania General Hospital at Hyderabad.  She<br \/>\ndied at 11.00 A.M. on 12.3.1988 due to burn injuries.<br \/>\nIt was alleged by the prosecution that the deceased<br \/>\ncommitted suicide because of cruel treatment of the<br \/>\nappellants after her marriage and that the appellants<br \/>\nwere demanding dowry from her.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThere is no direct evidence to establish the case<br \/>\nof the prosecution.  The prosecution mainly relied on<br \/>\nthe evidence of PWs-3 to 7, dying declaration (Exbt.<br \/>\nP2) recorded by the Magistrate V.Surender Rao (PW-1)<br \/>\nand Exbt. P-12, report made to Head Constable.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe learned Sessions Judge, finding some minor<br \/>\ncontradictions in Exbt. P-2 and P-12, and that Exbt. P-<br \/>\n2 was not recorded in the language in which the dying<br \/>\ndeclaration was made, rejected it stating that much<br \/>\nweight could not be given to it.  He also doubted<br \/>\nwhether the deceased was in a fit condition to make<br \/>\nsuch a dying declaration. The learned trial judge did<br \/>\nnot accept the case of the prosecution that scolding<br \/>\nand taunting of the deceased by the appellants for not<br \/>\npreparing proper food or that she was not good looking<br \/>\nwas not such a cruelty so as to push her to commit<br \/>\nsuicide.  For no good reasons, the trial court did not<br \/>\naccept the evidence of PW-3 to 7.  The High Court, on<br \/>\nreappreciation of the evidence objectively and on<br \/>\ndislodging the reasons given by the trial court for<br \/>\nacquittal, convicted and sentenced the appellants.  The<br \/>\nHigh Court held that the trial court was wrong in<br \/>\nrejecting Exbt. P-2, the dying declaration recorded by<br \/>\nPW-1, the Magistrate, particularly when it was attested<br \/>\nby the doctor on duty, PW-11.  The High Court has<br \/>\nnoticed that Surender Rao, PW-1, the Magistrate has<br \/>\ntestified that on 10.3.1988 he recorded dying<br \/>\ndeclaration between 2.46 A.M. to 3.15 A.M.  He has<br \/>\ncertified that he had signed it and had taken the<br \/>\nendorsement of the doctor on duty that the deceased was<br \/>\nin a fit state of mind to make a statement; the<br \/>\ndeceased had made the dying declaration in question-<br \/>\nanswer form in Urdu and he had translated the version<br \/>\nand recorded the declaration in English.  After<br \/>\nrecording her statement, he explained the statement in<br \/>\nHindi to the deceased who admitted its correctness.<br \/>\nThereafter, he took the thumb impression of the<br \/>\ndeceased on her declaration (Exbt.P-2).\t In cross-<br \/>\nexamination, he has stated that he could read and speak<br \/>\nin Hindi; the deceased had made statement in Urdu which<br \/>\nhe could understand as Urdu and Hindi languages are<br \/>\nalmost similar and in Hyderabad, Urdu and Hindi<br \/>\nlanguages are spoken in the same way, there being no<br \/>\nmuch difference.  PW-11, Dr. Vidya Sagar, corroborated<br \/>\nthe statement of PW-1,\tto the effect that the deceased<br \/>\nwas in a fit mental condition to make statement and<br \/>\nthat he was present when the statement was recorded by<br \/>\nthe Magistrate.\t The High Court also did not agree with<br \/>\nthe reasoning of the trial court that the comment or<br \/>\ntaunting for not preparing good food was not a serious<br \/>\nthing so as to say that the appellants treated the<br \/>\ndeceased with cruelty which made her to commit suicide.<br \/>\nThe High Court observed that based on evidence that<br \/>\ncontinuous taunting and teasing led the deceased to<br \/>\nsuch a situation where she had been disgusted and went<br \/>\nto the extent of pouring kerosene on herself and<br \/>\nburning.  The High Court observed that continuous<br \/>\nmental cruelty practised on the deceased was a grave<br \/>\nand serious provocation for an ordinary Indian women to<br \/>\ndo what the deceased had done in burning herself.\n<\/p>\n<p>Whether one spouse has been guilty of cruelty to<br \/>\nthe other is essentially a question of fact.  The<br \/>\nimpact of complaints, accusations or taunts on a person<br \/>\namounting to cruelty depends on various factors like<br \/>\nthe sensitivity of the individual victim concerned, the<br \/>\nsocial background, the environment, education etc.<br \/>\nFurther, mental cruelty varies from person to person<br \/>\ndepending on the intensity of sensitivity and the<br \/>\ndegree of courage or endurance to withstand such mental<br \/>\ncruelty.  In other words, each case has to be decided<br \/>\non its own facts to decide whether the mental cruelty<br \/>\nwas established or not.\t The High Court in the present<br \/>\ncase, having regard to the facts found and<br \/>\ncircumstances stated, rightly concluded that the<br \/>\ncontinuous taunting or teasing the deceased by the<br \/>\nappellants on one ground or the other amounted to<br \/>\nmental cruelty drawing her to end her life.  As found<br \/>\nby the learned Sessions Judge, out of 11 months of<br \/>\nmarried life, the deceased was forced to live in her<br \/>\nparents house and could live with her husband for a<br \/>\nperiod of two months in different spells. The High<br \/>\nCourt also took note of the fact that the appellants<br \/>\ndid not try to save the deceased although they were<br \/>\npresent when burn injuries were caused to her.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tWe are not impressed by the submissions made by<br \/>\nthe learned counsel for the appellants that the High<br \/>\nCourt committed an error in reversing the order of<br \/>\nacquittal made by the trial court merely because the<br \/>\nHigh Court could take a different view and that the<br \/>\nreasons given by the Sessions Court for recording<br \/>\nacquittal of the appellants were proper.  On the other<br \/>\nhand, the learned counsel for the State made<br \/>\nsubmissions supporting the impugned judgment and order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tHaving regard to the evidence brought on record<br \/>\nand looking to the reasons recorded by the High Court<br \/>\nas indicated in the foregoing paragraphs, we are of the<br \/>\nview that the trial court committed manifest error in<br \/>\ndisbelieving the dying declaration (Exbt P\/2) and the<br \/>\nevidence of PWs 3 to 7.\t We have no hesitation in<br \/>\nholding that the view taken by the trial court in<br \/>\nacquitting the appellants was not a reasonable and<br \/>\njustifiable view which could have been taken looking to<br \/>\nthe evidence keeping in view the well-settled<br \/>\nprinciples.  The High Court, in our opinion, was right<br \/>\nand justified in reversing the order of acquittal and<br \/>\nconvicting and sentencing the appellants for the<br \/>\noffences under Section 306 and 498-A IPC.  We find no<br \/>\ngood reason to interfere with the same. However, we<br \/>\nthink it just and appropriate to modify the sentence of<br \/>\nimprisonment for the period already undergone and order<br \/>\naccordingly having regard to the fact that both the<br \/>\nappellants were in imprisonment for about two months;<br \/>\nthe incident took place on 9.3.1988; the appellant No.<br \/>\n2 is the mother of the appellant No. 1 and she is aged<br \/>\n60 years; both the appellants are on bail and it may<br \/>\nnot be appropriate to send them to jail again.\tThe<br \/>\nappeal stands disposed of in the above terms.  The bail<br \/>\nbonds stand cancelled.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr vs State Of A.P on 16 September, 2002 Author: S V Patil Bench: U.C. Bannerjee, Shivaraj V. Patil. CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 871 of 1996 PETITIONER: Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr. Vs. RESPONDENT: State of A.P. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 16, 201902BENCH: U.C. BANNERJEE &amp;SHIVARAJ V. PATIL. [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-161248","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr vs State Of A.P on 16 September, 2002 - 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\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr vs State Of A.P on 16 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002\" \/>\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=\"2002-09-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-31T03:29:05+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\\\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr vs State Of A.P on 16 September, 2002\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-09-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-31T03:29:05+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002\"},\"wordCount\":1408,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002\",\"name\":\"Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr vs State Of A.P on 16 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2002-09-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-31T03:29:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr vs State Of A.P on 16 September, 2002\"}]},{\"@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":"Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr vs State Of A.P on 16 September, 2002 - 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\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr vs State Of A.P on 16 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2002-09-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-31T03:29:05+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\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr vs State Of A.P on 16 September, 2002","datePublished":"2002-09-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-31T03:29:05+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002"},"wordCount":1408,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002","name":"Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr vs State Of A.P on 16 September, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2002-09-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-31T03:29:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-hoshan-a-p-anr-vs-state-of-a-p-on-16-september-2002#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mohd. Hoshan, A.P. &amp; Anr vs State Of A.P on 16 September, 2002"}]},{"@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\/161248","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=161248"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/161248\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=161248"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=161248"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=161248"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}