{"id":161762,"date":"2010-10-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010"},"modified":"2015-06-05T03:35:18","modified_gmt":"2015-06-04T22:05:18","slug":"shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"Shri M Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Shri M Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Ashok B.Hinchigeri<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT 3ANc;AI_OR,E_\": \nDATED THIS THE 25?\" DAY OF OCTOBER 201-OE  \"  3\n\nBEFORE   ..\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOKIS. H_:IINCHIG.E'RI:\"p   \n\nWRIT PETITION No.23687_ Of,20O\u00a7A'(S--C,'ST}j  \nAND WRIT PETITION NOS.24Zv93,\"30O o:\u00b0.20O91=\n\nBETWEEN:\n\nSHRI M PRASAD\nAge:30 YEARS\n\nS\/O SHRIMNAGARAJ _  I   \nR\/ATN O.21\/16, 3RD ELOQR'  :  \n3RD MAIN, I<RISHNA,..T'OwIERS ~     .\nGANDHINAGAR *' _ '-   . \n\nBANGALORE 560 009,  1'-\n\n _ _      . .  PETITIONER\n(By Sri PRAKAS1.-_\u00a3 T HE3EAR,IIADv,OICA*'r.E)\nAND: V' %  V \n\n1.  THE S,TATET*OE KARNATAKA.\n 'REVENUE DEPARTMENT """ "\n STH IELC)QR,.M..S"--BUILDING,\n\nDR =AME.EDi<_AR "ROAD,\n3ANG.AL.O'RE'1.,._  \nREE; BY ITS SECRETARY.\n\n'THE DEPuT'.~: COMMISSIONER\ni.1'\u00ab.B'ANGALORE" RURAL DISTRICT\n' _V..ISVE~$WARAIAH TOWERS\n- DR'AM_IIEDI<AR ROAD,\n._.E,.BAH-'GALORE 1.\n\n ;__3.E ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER\n , R' ;DODDABAI_I.APuRA SUB DIVISION,\n\nDR AMBEDKAR ROAD,\nBANGALORE 1.\n\n \n\n\n\nSHRI MUNIRAJAPPA S\/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA\nMAJOR\n\nBETTAKOTE VILLAGE\n\nCHANNARAYAPATNA HOBLI\n\nDEVANAHALLI TALUK,   -\nBANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT. '\n\nSMT MUNIYAMMA W\/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA\nMAJOR =  \nBETTAKOTE VILLAGE \nCHANNARAYARATNA HOBLI\n\nDEVANAHALLI TALUK, _\n\nBANGALORE RURAL DISTRICT,\n\nSHRI DODDA VENKATAPPA As\/_O'T  BYAT-ARRAVV..'-'-~\n\nMAJOR  ._ 1 _ . \nBETTAKOTE    \nCHANNARAYAPAT.NA5LH_Q_BLI\u00e9"  \nDEVANAHALLI TAL'UK,"'  .  "\n\nBANGALORE Ru.RAL:'O;sTR_1cT;'v--' ~  A\n\nSH RI CHIKKA vEm<,AjfA:?PA\u00ab..$"\/C)_ LATE BYATAPPA\nMAJOR 2 * A    "\n\nBETTAKOTE u\\\/I'LLAGE_ A  <\ncHANNARAYARA'rNA HOBLI' \n\nDEVANAHALLI TALUR,  A\n\n _ BANGALORE RuRAL=n1V$TR.xCT.\n\n SLi91RI_.xCrII_|1{rfAP4I?nA:IVAH S\/O LATE MUNISHAMAPPA\n'-s;wcE"a.EA.rg BY' L. Rs.\n\n(aj\ufb01 "LAGUMA;pRA\n"'\u00ab\u00abAGE_;'3'ABOUT 50 YEARS\n\n '  SRRI LIMUNIYAPPA\n\n* =-AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS\n\n  SHR1 ASWATHA\n\nAGED ABOUT 38 YEARS\n\n , _(d) SHRI NAGARAJ\n\nAGED ABOUT 35$ YEARS\n\n(8) SHRI NARAYANASWAMY\nAGED ABOUT 30 YEARS.\n\n \n\n\n\n(a) to (62) ARE THE SONS OF LATE CHIKKAPRAIAH,,......','_;  \n\n(f) SMT MEENA\nD\/O LATE CHIKKAPPAIAH\nAGE 28 YEARS.\n\nALL ARE R\/A RAYASANDRA VILLAGE.\nKASABA HOBLI,  .\nDEVANAHALL1 TALUK.\n\nI.) * P.ESPO)NDENTS\n\n(By Sri R.DEvDAS, AGA FOR R-1"'-To .3,'--sR{I'SAi:;A'S.,H'TvA FOR FOR R4-\n7, SRI VIJAY KUMAR FOR R--8(a) to (f), \u00a3\\D\\fOCA_T'ES'}. _ \n\nTHESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILE-O 'UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND\n227 OF THE CONSTITU'I'1Hi'Of~i.,O.FKNDIA evRRA.v'I'N'G TO QUASH THE\nORDER DT. 16.4.2\u00a73o4'_PASSIED 'EIjI<._T'HE"-THI'I-Io, RESPONDENT AS PER<\/pre>\n
ANNEX-A AND ALSO_T”1HE\u00bb’,ORLFER”D.T.._6′.’1.2(309 PASSED BY THE 2ND
\nRESPONDENT A.S—-PER’~ANN’i_7;X-.B AND ETC–.—…. <\/p>\n
THESE IAIRIT’I=ET’ITijONS.,,C’O.{\u00e91″ING’ON FOR PRL HG. IN ‘B’ GRUP
\nTHIS DAY, THE COURT IIIADETHE._FOI.LOwING:<\/p>\n
l”deEQRbER<\/p>\n
 VTiT.e_’vl’petiti,Aonehhas raised the challenge to the order, dated<\/p>\n
 16.0-4″.”2O0._=;V.l(Avn’ne\u00a7<II'Ife'\u00a5A) passed by the Assistant Commissioner<\/p>\n
 the Order_, 'dated 06.01.2009 (Annexure~B) passed by the<\/p>\n
uC,o'mm'issioner.\n<\/p>\n
  facts of the case in brief are that 4 acres of land at<\/p>\n
 SyI,_4N’or;44\/1 of Rayasandra Village, Kasaba Hobli, Devanahalli<\/p>\n
 was allotted to Sri Byatappa on 14.05.1952. Out of the<\/p>\n
said land, Byatappa sold\ufb01z acres to Sri Chikkappaiah on<\/p>\n
BH.\n<\/p>\n
15.06.1960 and 22.01.1962. The said Chikkappaiah gVg:fr.he””sa’iid< H<\/p>\n
agricultural land converted for non~agricultural "p_urpose' Horn, <\/p>\n
16.06.1997. He along with his family men1be.rs 'sold<\/p>\n
to the petitioner through his agent and  attorney <\/p>\n
Sri Subba Rao ~– one sale deed  'sale 0'<\/p>\n
deeds, dated 30.06.2006.\n<\/p>\n
3. At the other end of  sought
\nthe restoration of   S\u20ac:9t’i:9h”‘5″i\u00e9of the Scheduled
\nCastes and Schedu.lVe’d_”ffrhieee  of Transfer of Certain
\nLands) Act, * .C_0rnn1issioner by his order,
\ndated 16.04.2004″int\/aEi.d’at.ed :,th.e,t’sare deed executed in favour of
\nChikkappaiah. a.ndkdi:rectedAflvitswrestoration to Byatappa. This<\/p>\n
or’d,e.r”‘~0,fv”the*7Ass’istant VC0n1missioner was challenged by Sri<\/p>\n
 chakigapaaiajr.eg,twig an appeal LND.SC\/ST(A).4\/2004-05<\/p>\n
:’v.Tb’ef0re the-..__Depu*ty’Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner by<\/p>\n
‘ “his”<oVrder,, dated' 03.07.2006 allowed the appeal by setting aside<\/p>\n
0  Commissioner's order, dated 16.04.2004.<\/p>\n
 .4." This order of the Deputy Commissioner was challenged<\/p>\n
 the L.Rs of Byatappa in W.P.No.12536\/2006. As the effect of<\/p>\n
official memorandum, dated 14.05.1952 was not considered in<\/p>\n
IQBH.\n<\/p>\n
 ~.L”40V.’7\u20aco_rhiniAssio’ner’s order, dated 16.04.2004. The present petitioner<\/p>\n
 V’If-..has=instituted this petition raising the challenge to the two said<\/p>\n
2)
\nits proper perspective, this Court set aside the Deputy<\/p>\n
Commissioner’s order and remanded the matter fo’r._ifre3h<\/p>\n
consideration. In the remanded appeal <\/p>\n
Chikkappaiah filed a memo seeking the d\u00bbisvmissa_l-“of.-it w
\nThe memo reads as follows: A 0 0<\/p>\n
“The appellant in the above app’eal”‘subn’;:i’ts’that
\nthe land bearing Sy.lVo.4-4\/1, nieastrring 2..aCres’ iee
\ngranted land, granted to oneV,Snl..”LBva~tappa,”‘SI\/o
\nDoddappajappa, under tiiezV:.’dep’res.:sed”cia.ss’~roles. The
\nappellant purchased the said fon_.~..25.\\Q-1.__1..962 and
\n15.06.1968, un_d.ejr;’ -two tiirreient ‘Sa.r.e ‘-Deeds. After
\nveri\ufb01cation otthe    to lgenoivithat the land in
\nquestion is  grari,teVdti2e respondents herein
\nbelongs  ~’m’bep  and the appellant
\nhas violated theto.’:dition’s;l._:’Hence I have no intentions to
\ncontinue the” proceedir;gis’–~._eihd”therefore pray that this
\nHon ‘ble Cotirttdrnay ~__be., pleased to dismiss the above<\/p>\n
V appeaillasoinot pressed and confirmed the order passed by
\n_0’theeV”Asst?’Co’mn1ission’er\u00e9 passed in Case lVo.P.T.C.L.SR
\n _Ne.’2o\/.19-s;\ufb019~oo,V:’ dated 25–o4-2004, in the interest or<\/p>\n
j’ustic.e’ and
\n  The..i5e_pul:y Commissioner for the reasons stated in the<\/p>\n
 ‘i._’rnVeriiondismissed the appeal by upholding the Assistant<\/p>\n
HRH.\n<\/p>\n
6<\/span>
\norders of the Assistant Commissioner and the Deputy<\/p>\n
Commissioner.\n<\/p>\n
5. Sri Prakash Hebbar, the learned counsel  <\/p>\n
petitioner submits that the Assistant CoAm’mis\u00e9si’one\u00abr’s’o_rder7<\/p>\n
confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner   <\/p>\n
formed the lay–out and sold the’-vioa”ri.d to the~_thirldwpartlies, if<\/p>\n
Chikkappaiah had no surviving.inte.re’st.lVo_i’nthe lanolin ‘question.
\nThere was no need for him  further submits
\nthat the said Chikkai\ufb01iaiah  to make one
\nmore unlawful  l’e;ag.ue with the L.Rs of
\nBYataPDa. HVe”s’ubi;lfi’:lt.s ;t’li\u00a7E’t ails;-eo’e*it’eicider, dated 13.08.2007
\npassed in  has to be given effect to
\nby considering  merits. He submits that the land
\nw:asi.giVndeed\u00ab:.  g_rante’d-.to.\u00abthe said Byatappa. On the other<\/p>\n
hand, ‘ft.il’l” -con.si’die’ra:tio_n was taken from him and the land was<\/p>\n
:*”a,_sold to”hir’n. VIf*.toi\u00e9,e.’e1’sa|e consideration is collected for giving a<\/p>\n
_’lrlanol,..Vit arnountsto sale and not a grant under the Land Grant<\/p>\n
.:Rule’s;~.ie trite submission of Sri Hebba r.<\/p>\n
  7tgHe further submits that the grant certificate is in Form<\/p>\n
.   issuable only to the sale deed holders. He has relied on the<\/p>\n
I<\/p>\n
 order is not sustainabie, the Assistant
\nVt”Colmmissio\u00e9nerisalorder does not Catt for any interference, as the
\niAs~e.pasve’d on the objective scrutiny of a number of
\n He submits that as the sake in favour of<\/p>\n
it’_g._VCh’i-\u00abltkhalppaiah is invatid, the subsequent sales effected by<\/p>\n
7<\/span>
\nHon’bEe Supreme Court’s judgment in the case of<\/p>\n
B.K.Ml}NIRAJU V. STATE OF KARNATAKA 8:\n<\/p>\n
reported in (2008) 4 SCC 451. The relevant paragra’ph\u00a7oi’..:th-a: _<\/p>\n
said judgment is extracted hereinbelow:\n<\/p>\n
“19. The above principles make  f
\nhave to see terms and conditions anrj :recitals.’in”the it 3
\ndocument and not the title alone.._V:”FhVough ” the idocu_n’ie;n’t;
\naccording to the appellant, “certl’\ufb01ca.te of gra’nt’._’y: lp’erusal<\/p>\n
of the clauses therein, clearly eaowslmrlhe lane was
\nsold on 4-3-1948 in all\u00e9lplublic _Motappa
\npurchased the same for a air?” addition
\nto the recitals, ;t’h\u00a73’\u00aby:.flrJari<:i3as;t' register extract" produced
\nas Annexure 1:-'(1"it-eforef-the\u00ab.lfllrTc;.iii.. _Co-urt_'als_o shows that the
\nland in questi'on:~-ii\u00e9tas sold  Form 1 also
\nindicatez\u00e9yllthati'  !Tii'o_'uestio'n"V'vvas purchased and
\nwhat waspaid by: ~purc4ha..s:Ver__'under the said document
\nwas the purthalse priced' . V.'  J<\/p>\n
 'Vv_F<.l1)vevdas,.___the learned Additional Government<\/p>\n
Ad'v'oVcat;e'–\u00bbfor  respo_ndent Nos.1 to 3 submits that even if the<\/p>\n
I-13%<\/p>\n
Chikkappaiah or through his agent and power of attornefyH:hoi.j'c'\u00a3.e'ri.V<\/p>\n
Sri Subba Rao can also have no vaiidity at aii.<\/p>\n
9. Sri Sadashiva, the learned counsel,-‘for? the irespon’d.eritV.ii<\/p>\n
Nos.4 to 7 submits that just because -the saguvaigi chit
\nNo.1, it cannot be presumed that  got based on
\nthe sale consideration. He  oi the grant
\nhas to be ascertained from  o.f’vth\u00bb’el_d’ocuments and
\nnot mereiy on its,,i?i,75\u00e9\u00a7?ii:ri’_9  C._3’\u00a7$ti?”.’I’I\u00a7.:V,’:’\\.He*”‘submits that the
\nAssistant  documents, has
\ndeiivered 3  .\n<\/p>\n
a) The iaind inouestioratii:_s’—a’:gV’g.*anted iand,\n<\/p>\n
b) Byatappaaubeioinged to seheduled Tribe.
\n   upret\/aittiting Ruies imposed perpetual non-<\/p>\n
  ‘Va_i-iena.tron’ ci’au.se.\n<\/p>\n
3.0. S4}i,S’a,dashiva submits that the petitioner’s grievance,<\/p>\n
.1ifA..Va’ri\\’_’z,i..has-to be oniy against Chikkappaiah and\/or his power of<\/p>\n
the-4’attornei\/’Ehoider, Sri Subba Rao. The petitioner is notjustified in<\/p>\n
 j_-.pro”ce,e”di’ng against the respondent Nos.4 to 7. He wouid further<\/p>\n
 that the petitioner has sought the quashing of the<\/p>\n
Assistant Commissioner’s and the Deputy Commissioner’s orders<\/p>\n
\ufb01g\ufb01.\n<\/p>\n
in their entirety, although the petitioner’s interest <\/p>\n
respect of a small fraction of 2 acres of land — 3 sites’;  <\/p>\n
11. Sn’ Vijaya Kumar, the learned counse\u00e9l2a’ppea4ri’n:g____Vtoreit<\/p>\n
the L.Rs of the 8″‘ respondent Ch\u00bbi’kl<_appa'ia_h"subri\ufb01tsyiltyhglat <\/p>\n
said Chikkappaiah purchased the large in aqueustiontvfgwithout
\nknowing that it is a land   belonging to
\nScheduled Tribe. He submitst.h_a"tothertiiz."s"\u00bbof&'\u00bb':Cgh'i'Vkkappaiah are
\nnot aware of the  mstitioner, if any, to<\/p>\n
the power of attorn.eyfi__lil}lde'r,'  <\/p>\n
12. What  facts and the submissions
\nmade at the barisyiithat C4hi.i_V<i<a.:_i\u00a7'paiah purchased the land from
\nByat.a_ppa,_~ Chill<kap.Ho__ayiah subsequently acknowledges as a<\/p>\n
sch'egluiVed..frrsit_;'e~igrantee. The Deputy Commissioner without<\/p>\n
:–"*,_noticing"gw'hether'."gj–itVf=was a free-hold land or a granted land<\/p>\n
lpgerrnitted uth.e'"KNA" conversion. Based on the NA conversion<\/p>\n
Chilzlgaplpaiah formed the lay-out and sold the sites to<\/p>\n
.A'-4"_d.if_ferent; persons including the petitioner. Admittedly, the sites<\/p>\n
 '.gjv..we'reVVso'ld through the agent and power of attorney holder of Sri<\/p>\n
uichikkappaiah. Having sold the sites, Chikkappaiah does not<\/p>\n
bother to safeguard the interests of the purchaser. On the other<\/p>\n
GBH.\n<\/p>\n
H<\/p>\n
the appeai in the letter and spirit of the said order passe.d”‘-py H<\/p>\n
Court. The petitioner is directed to make  it<\/p>\n
application for irnpleading himselfj”be’fore<\/p>\n
Commissioner. However, it is for the Dep_u:t’y: A.\u20ac’3on1l’r’piss\u00bbioneu\u00a2:4’.’toil”<\/p>\n
decide, on hearing the concerned  and rnorevjpaurti:c’u’l’a’riy,
\nthe respondent Nos.4 to 7 a5.__t0  relief to be
\nconfined only to petitioner’s   sites. The
\nDeputy Cornmissioneris    remanded
\nappeal as expediti-o’u:siy Va”nd:.pin.V.any case, within an
\nouter limit of 5’tljeyld\u00e9ateiiof\ufb01the production of the
\ncertified copy ” l<\/p>\n
15. These petivtionsrareraccordingly disposed of. No order<\/p>\n
as:-to c’osts’.”- . ‘<\/p>\n
Sale
\n7Iii’d\u00a7’\u00a7<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Shri M Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 2010 Author: Ashok B.Hinchigeri IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT 3ANc;AI_OR,E_”: DATED THIS THE 25?” DAY OF OCTOBER 201-OE ” 3 BEFORE .. THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOKIS. H_:IINCHIG.E’RI:”p WRIT PETITION No.23687_ Of,20O\u00a7A'(S–C,’ST}j AND WRIT PETITION NOS.24Zv93,”30O o:\u00b0.20O91= BETWEEN: SHRI […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-161762","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nShri M Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 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\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri M Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-10-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-06-04T22:05:18+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\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri M Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-06-04T22:05:18+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1558,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010\",\"name\":\"Shri M Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-06-04T22:05:18+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri M Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Shri M Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 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\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri M Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-06-04T22:05:18+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\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri M Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-06-04T22:05:18+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010"},"wordCount":1558,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010","name":"Shri M Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-06-04T22:05:18+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-m-prasad-vs-the-state-of-karnataka-on-25-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri M Prasad vs The State Of Karnataka on 25 October, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/161762","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=161762"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/161762\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=161762"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=161762"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=161762"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}