{"id":167075,"date":"2010-10-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010"},"modified":"2017-03-13T07:01:04","modified_gmt":"2017-03-13T01:31:04","slug":"vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"Vrundavan vs State on 31 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Vrundavan vs State on 31 October, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Jayant Patel,&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\nSCA\/13731\/2005\t 8\/ 8\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 13731 of 2005\n \n\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\nVRUNDAVAN\nPARTY PLOT - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT &amp; 1 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance : \nMR\nHARIN P RAVAL for Petitioner(s) : 1, \nMR SATYAM\nCHAYYA, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1, \nNOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s)\n: 1, \nMR MD PANDYA for Respondent(s) :\n2, \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 JAYANT PATEL\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 24\/01\/2007 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>Draft<br \/>\n\tamendment granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tpetitioner has preferred the petition for appropriate writ to<br \/>\n\tdeclare that the designation\/reservation of the lands sub-plot No.11<br \/>\n\tbearing Survey No. 1, Tikka No.9-c admeasuring 29035 sq.mtr. has<br \/>\n\tlapsed and the petitioner has also prayed the other consequential<br \/>\n\trelief in the petition based on the premise that the reservation has<br \/>\n\tlapsed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Heard<br \/>\n\tMr. Raval, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Pandya, appearing<br \/>\n\tfor respondent No.2 and Mr. Chayya, learned AGP for respondent No.1.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tPandya for the Urban Land Development Authority at the outset<br \/>\n\tdeclared before the Court that in view of the preliminary<br \/>\n\tnotification for revised development plan, the land is not reserved<br \/>\n\tor sought to be reserved for any purposes of the local authority or<br \/>\n\tUrban Land Development Authority and he submitted that the<br \/>\n\tdesignation is different than the reservation.\n<\/p>\n<p>It<br \/>\n\twas submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner<br \/>\n\tthat in view of the principles laid down by Division Bench of this<br \/>\n\tCourt in its decision in the case of Palitana<br \/>\n\tSugar Mill Pvt. Ltd &amp; Anr. Vs. State of Gujarat &amp; Ors.<br \/>\n\treported at 2001(4) GLR, 3049, the reservation would lapse if<br \/>\n\tthe acquisition proceedings are not undertaken by the acquiring body<br \/>\n\tpursuant to the development plan and he further submitted that if<br \/>\n\tthe reservation has lapsed under the guise of the Revised<br \/>\n\tDevelopment Plan, it is not open to the Authority to contemplate the<br \/>\n\tsame reservation or the reservation for different purpose and<br \/>\n\ttherefore, he submitted that this Court may interfere and entertain<br \/>\n\tthe petition.  Mr. Raval also submitted that the plans which are<br \/>\n\tsubmitted with the draft amendment goes to show that the reservation<br \/>\n\tis for public institutional purpose and therefore, it cannot be said<br \/>\n\tthat the use may be permitted by the land holder or any private<br \/>\n\tperson and therefore, it must be deemed as the reservation.  He also<br \/>\n\tsubmitted that when the position of law is already laid down by the<br \/>\n\tDivision Bench of this Court, no useful purpose would be served in<br \/>\n\trelegating the matter to the development authority to file objection<br \/>\n\tand to take appropriate decision.  In his submission, it would be a<br \/>\n\tfutile  exercise.  He therefore submitted that this Court may admit<br \/>\n\tthe petition to finally adjudicate the issue.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tPandya, learned counsel appearing for the Development Authority in<br \/>\n\taddition to the aforesaid declaration, by relying upon the another<br \/>\n\tsubsequent decision of the Division Bench of this Court (Coram:J.M.<br \/>\n\tPanchal &amp; Abhilasha Kumari,J.J.) dated 15.11.2006 in Letters<br \/>\n\tPatent Appeal No. 1452 of 2005, contended inter alia that the<br \/>\n\tdesignation is different than the reservation.  He further submitted<br \/>\n\tthat the decision of the Palitana Sugar Mill (Supra) upon which the<br \/>\n\trelevance is placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner came<br \/>\n\tto be considered by the Division Bench of this Court and the<br \/>\n\tdecision in the case of Palitana Sugar Mill is treated as that of<br \/>\n\tlaying down the principles that the reservation would lapse if the<br \/>\n\tacquisition has not taken place within the requisite period and it<br \/>\n\tis not a decision to be treated as no other reservation or the<br \/>\n\tdesignation is permissible.  He therefore submitted that when the<br \/>\n\tmatter is yet to be finalised by the Development Authority, this<br \/>\n\tCourt may not entertain the petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>Having<br \/>\n\tconsidered the above, it appears that the whole premise of the<br \/>\n\tpetition is on the basis that the reservation and the designation<br \/>\n\tare same thing.  As such, the reservation has different<br \/>\n\trepercussions and the designations will have different<br \/>\n\trepercussions.  Reservation means the land to be acquired by the<br \/>\n\tbody for the purpose to be achieved by such body whereas the<br \/>\n\tdesignation means the land to be used for such purpose and it only<br \/>\n\trestricts the use and it does not contemplate the acquisition.<br \/>\n\tFurther, whether such designation even otherwise also is to be<br \/>\n\tcontinued or not is an aspect yet to be finalised by the authority<br \/>\n\tbut at this stage it cannot be said that the cause on the basis of<br \/>\n\twhich the petitioner has based the petition has continued to remain<br \/>\n\tin operation.  The aforesaid is coupled with the circumstance that<br \/>\n\tas per the respondent, development authority, the notice under<br \/>\n\tSection 20 of the Gujarat Town Planning &amp; Urban Development Act<br \/>\n\t(hereinafter referred to as &#8216;the Act&#8217;) was not given to the<br \/>\n\tacquiring body and therefore, the reservation would not lapse.  I<br \/>\n\tfind that it may not be necessary for this Court to decide the said<br \/>\n\taspects as to whether the reservation had lapsed or not,  since now,<br \/>\n\tas per the proposed development plan, the reservation has not<br \/>\n\tcontinued over the land in question as per the declaration made and<br \/>\n\trecorded hereinabove, and the only use is notified by providing of<br \/>\n\tthe zone etc.<\/p>\n<p>It<br \/>\n\tis otherwise also well settled that normally when the statutory<br \/>\n\tauthority is to exercise the power, the Court would normally not<br \/>\n\tinterfere in such exercise of power on the premise that the wisdom<br \/>\n\twould prevail or that the decision would be as per the statutory<br \/>\n\tprovision or as per the well settled principles of law.  In such<br \/>\n\tcases, normally the Court would permit the statutory authority to<br \/>\n\texercise the power and if the citizen or any person affected is<br \/>\n\taggrieved to such initiation of the power, the Court would relegate<br \/>\n\tsuch persons to file the objections, permit the statutory authority<br \/>\n\tto consider such objections and to take appropriate decision.  It is<br \/>\n\tonly in exceptional cases where either there is inherent lack of<br \/>\n\tpower or initiation of the action is ex-facie absurd or malafide or<br \/>\n\twith bias consideration, the Court may exercise the power at the<br \/>\n\tstage of initiation of the exercise of the statutory power.  No such<br \/>\n\tconsiderations can be said as satisfied, more particularly when the<br \/>\n\twhole premise of the petition is on the basis of the reservation<br \/>\n\twhich is no more in existence and what is under contemplation is the<br \/>\n\tdesignated use of the land.\n<\/p>\n<p>If<br \/>\n\tthe petitioner has any grievance to raise against the designated use<br \/>\n\tof the land as per the preliminary notification, the petitioner may<br \/>\n\traise objections as may be permissible in law and if such objections<br \/>\n\tare raised by the petitioner, the authority shall consider the same<br \/>\n\tin accordance with law but at this stage.  Considering the facts and<br \/>\n\tcircumstances, I find that it would be a case to entertain the<br \/>\n\tpetition.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tRaval, learned counsel for the petitioner attempted to submit that<br \/>\n\twhen the petition was filed, there was no preliminary notification<br \/>\n\tfor revised development plan including of the designation, and<br \/>\n\ttherefore, the same may not be considered by this Court.  I am<br \/>\n\tafraid such contention can be accepted when this Court is to<br \/>\n\texercise the power under Article 226 of the Constitution in the<br \/>\n\tmatter of undertaking judicial scrutiny of the development plan.<br \/>\n\tThere is no reason not to consider the subsequent development which<br \/>\n\thas happened pending the petition.  Even otherwise also, the Court<br \/>\n\tdoes not exercise the power for academic purpose and the writ would<br \/>\n\tbe futile if there is change in circumstances and therefore, the<br \/>\n\tsaid contention of Mr. Raval cannot be accepted.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tRaval, learned counsel for the petitioner also attempted to submit<br \/>\n\tthat if this Court does not entertain the petition at this stage and<br \/>\n\trelegates the petitioner to file objection before the authority, the<br \/>\n\torder may be constructed as that the Court did not interfere with<br \/>\n\tthe action and the authorities can proceed and therefore, he<br \/>\n\tsubmitted that this Court may entertain the petition at this stage.<br \/>\n\tI find that such contention raised is only on misconception and on<br \/>\n\thypothesis.  The effect of the order can always be seen and it would<br \/>\n\tbe reflected in the order of this Court by express language.  If the<br \/>\n\torder is misunderstood, it can always be examined at the appropriate<br \/>\n\tstage, if challenge is brought to this Court.  But on such<br \/>\n\tmisconception and hypothesis, the petition cannot be entertained at<br \/>\n\tthis stage.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tRaval, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also attempted<br \/>\n\tto submit that if the authority decides to drop the designation in<br \/>\n\tthe revised development plan by accepting the objection of th<br \/>\n\tpetitioner, the original development plan for reservation would<br \/>\n\tstand revived and therefore, he submitted that the challenge would<br \/>\n\talso continue to survive and therefore, this Court may entertain the<br \/>\n\tpetition. In my view, such contention is also on misconception<br \/>\n\tinasmuch as once there is an initiation of the revised development<br \/>\n\tplan in which the reservation has not continued and if the<br \/>\n\tdesignation is made in either way, it would not result into revival<br \/>\n\tof the earlier development plan which has loosed its operation on<br \/>\n\taccount of the subsequent action of the development authority for<br \/>\n\trevised development plan.  Hence, the said contention cannot be<br \/>\n\taccepted.\n<\/p>\n<p>Under<br \/>\n\tthe above circumstances, the petition is not entertained at this<br \/>\n\tstage.  However, it is directed that if the petitioner files<br \/>\n\tobjection to the revised development plan, the same may be<br \/>\n\tconsidered by the authority in accordance with law in any case,<br \/>\n\tprior to the taking final decision on the revised development plan.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tDisposed<br \/>\noff accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>  (JAYANT PATEL, J.)<\/p>\n<p>*bjoy<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Vrundavan vs State on 31 October, 2010 Author: Jayant Patel,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/13731\/2005 8\/ 8 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 13731 of 2005 ========================================================= VRUNDAVAN PARTY PLOT &#8211; Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT &amp; 1 &#8211; Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance [&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-167075","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>Vrundavan vs State on 31 October, 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\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vrundavan vs State on 31 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-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=\"2010-10-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-03-13T01:31:04+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\\\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Vrundavan vs State on 31 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-13T01:31:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1533,\"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\\\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010\",\"name\":\"Vrundavan vs State on 31 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-13T01:31:04+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vrundavan vs State on 31 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Vrundavan vs State on 31 October, 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\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vrundavan vs State on 31 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-03-13T01:31:04+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\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Vrundavan vs State on 31 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-13T01:31:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010"},"wordCount":1533,"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\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010","name":"Vrundavan vs State on 31 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-13T01:31:04+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vrundavan-vs-state-on-31-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vrundavan vs State on 31 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:\/\/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\/167075","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=167075"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/167075\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=167075"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=167075"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=167075"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}