{"id":167492,"date":"1991-02-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1991-02-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991"},"modified":"2014-05-07T08:30:30","modified_gmt":"2014-05-07T03:00:30","slug":"k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991","title":{"rendered":"K.T. Kuriyan vs K.K. Sreedharan on 18 February, 1991"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
K.T. Kuriyan vs K.K. Sreedharan on 18 February, 1991<\/div>\n
Author: S Padmanabhan<\/div>\n
Bench: S Padmanabhan<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
 S. Padmanabhan, J.<\/p>\n
1. The revision petitioner filed a private complaint alleging that the respondent committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Magistrate examined the petitioner on oath, as provided in Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and postponed the issue of process since he thought that an enquiry under Section 202 is necessary. No further evidence was adduced, On the ground that the offence is not disclosed, complaint was dismissed under Section 203, without taking cognizance. Order is challenged in revision.\n<\/p>\n
2. Allegation in the complaint and the sworn statement of the petitioner is that the respondent took a loan of Rs. 9,250 from him on July 3, 1989, and on that day itself, he issued a post-dated cheque (date is August 15, 1989) for the same amount. Cheque was presented on August 15, 1989, but dishonoured on the same day for want of funds. The respondent was orally informed and as directed by him, cheque was again presented in December, 1989, and on February 8, 1990. On both these days also, it was dishonoured. On February 9, 1990, a notice was issued and on March 24, 1990, a complaint was filed since the amount was not paid.\n<\/p>\n
3. Dismissal of the complaint was for the reason that the offence is not disclosed because proviso (b) to Section 138 of the Act is not complied with. Counsel says that the direction of the respondent to present the cheque again operates as a fresh agreement between the parties and hence notice within fifteen days of the last direction given by the respondent must be taken as sufficient compliance with the condition in proviso (b). I do not think that this argument could be accepted. Even if it is accepted, then also the complaint is out of time.\n<\/p>\n
4. Deception or fraudulent or dishonest inducement of the deceived person to deliver property required for an offence of cheating, as defined
\nin Section 415 of the Indian Penal Code, is not necessary so far as Section 138 of the Act is concerned. Section 138 creates a new offence, for which these mental elements are not necessary. It is enough if a cheque is drawn by the accused on an account maintained by him with a banker for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability due. That means, the cheque must have been issued in discharge of a debt or other liability wholly or in part. A cheque given as a gift or for any other reason and not for the satisfaction of any debt or other liability, partly or wholly, even if it is returned unpaid, will not meet with the penal consequences. As the Explanation shows, the debt or other liability must be legally enforceable also. As provided in Section 139, the presumption in such cases will be that the cheque was drawn and received in discharge of a debt or other liability in whole or in part and the contrary is to be proved by the drawer who is prosecuted.\n<\/p>\n
5. When the above condition is satisfied, irrespective of the mental condition of the drawer, he shall be deemed to have committed an offence, provided some other ingredients are also there. They are :\n<\/p>\n
(a) the cheque must be returned either because the money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with the bank ;\n<\/p>\n
(b) the cheque has been presented within six months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier ;\n<\/p>\n
(c) the payee or holder in due course makes a demand by a notice in writing to the drawer within fifteen days of the receipt of the information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid ; and<\/p>\n
(d) the drawer of the cheque fails to make the payment within fifteen days of the receipt of the notice.\n<\/p>\n
6. An offence is complete only if all these conditions are satisfied. The mere drawing of a cheque and its dishonour even if it constitutes an offence of cheating, as defined in Section 415 of the Penal Code, will not be an offence under Section 138 unless the above conditions are satisfied. So far as Section 138 is concerned, mens rea is irrelevant. That is why it is specified in Section 140 that it shall not be a defence in a prosecution for an offence under Section 138 that the drawer had no reason to believe when he issued the cheque that it may be dishonoured for the reasons stated in Section 138. As Section 142(b) indicates, the cause of action for a prosecution under Section 138 will arise only under Clause (c) of the
\nproviso to Section 138 when the drawer fails to make the payment within fifteen days of receipt of the notice under Clause (b) of the proviso and there is a prohibition against taking cognizance except on a complaint in writing by the payee or holder in due course and that too except when the complaint is made within one month of the date on which the cause of action arises.\n<\/p>\n
7. It is trite law of interpretation of statutes that penal provisions will have to be strictly construed and interpreted. A combined reading of all the above provisions will indicate that the law-making body in its wisdom wanted to penalise the drawer only if all the conditions enumerated in the section and the proviso are satisfied. The proviso definitely says that nothing in the section penalising the drawer will apply unless its three clauses are also satisfied. That means, it is not the mere dishonouring of the cheque for the reasons mentioned in Section 138 that is intended to be penalised. The cheque must have been presented in proper time and dishonoured for the reasons stated in the section, he must have been given time and opportunity by a written demand made within fifteen days of the receipt of intimation of dishonour, such intimation was received by him and he failed to make the payment within fifteen days of the receipt of the said notice. The offence and the cause of action for the prosecution are complete only when these formalities are strictly complied with and the drawer failed to make payment. Failure to make payment is the crux of the offence. The purpose of the section is to ensure that cheques are honoured.\n<\/p>\n
8. Time fixed in the different clauses of the proviso, when taken along with Section 142(b), indicates that it is part of the period of limitation. Presentation of the cheque at the earliest point of time provided, notice within fifteen days of receipt of the information of dishonour and failure to make payment within fifteen days of receipt of the notice are all ingredients in constituting the offence. By an agreement, even if there is an agreement, the drawer cannot postpone satisfaction of the conditions in the proviso. The cheque was presented and dishonoured on August 15, 1989, and intimation was then and there received by the petitioner. He only says that he met the respondent and there was a direction to present the cheque again. Such a direction cannot, dispense with or postpone the requirement of Clause (b) of the proviso. Notice was issued only on February 9, 1990, which is long after fifteen days. Therefore, the question of compliance with Clause (c) of the proviso does not arise and it cannot be said that the offence is made out. Even from the date of receipt of notice, the complaint was filed more than one month afterwards.\n<\/p>\n
9. The magistrate was well justified in dismissing the complaint as the offence is not disclosed. The criminal revision petition is dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court K.T. Kuriyan vs K.K. Sreedharan on 18 February, 1991 Author: S Padmanabhan Bench: S Padmanabhan JUDGMENT S. Padmanabhan, J. 1. The revision petitioner filed a private complaint alleging that the respondent committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Magistrate examined the petitioner on oath, as provided […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-167492","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nK.T. Kuriyan vs K.K. Sreedharan on 18 February, 1991 - 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\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"K.T. Kuriyan vs K.K. Sreedharan on 18 February, 1991 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991\" \/>\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=\"1991-02-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-05-07T03:00:30+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\\\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"K.T. Kuriyan vs K.K. Sreedharan on 18 February, 1991\",\"datePublished\":\"1991-02-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-07T03:00:30+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991\"},\"wordCount\":1316,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991\",\"name\":\"K.T. Kuriyan vs K.K. Sreedharan on 18 February, 1991 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1991-02-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-05-07T03:00:30+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"K.T. Kuriyan vs K.K. Sreedharan on 18 February, 1991\"}]},{\"@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":"K.T. Kuriyan vs K.K. Sreedharan on 18 February, 1991 - 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\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"K.T. Kuriyan vs K.K. Sreedharan on 18 February, 1991 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1991-02-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-05-07T03:00:30+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\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"K.T. Kuriyan vs K.K. Sreedharan on 18 February, 1991","datePublished":"1991-02-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-07T03:00:30+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991"},"wordCount":1316,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991","name":"K.T. Kuriyan vs K.K. Sreedharan on 18 February, 1991 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1991-02-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-05-07T03:00:30+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/k-t-kuriyan-vs-k-k-sreedharan-on-18-february-1991#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"K.T. Kuriyan vs K.K. Sreedharan on 18 February, 1991"}]},{"@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\/167492","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=167492"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/167492\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=167492"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=167492"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=167492"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}