{"id":16983,"date":"2009-02-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-02-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009"},"modified":"2017-08-02T11:04:36","modified_gmt":"2017-08-02T05:34:36","slug":"nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009","title":{"rendered":"Nousheer Ahamed vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Nousheer Ahamed vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: S.R.Bannurmath & Gowda<\/div>\n
 _ A'CEN1_T\ufb01ALV msow, \"?\u00abAN_GAE_0RE)\n\n-1-\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT BANGALC)l\u00a7:E:__V:1'   \n\nDATED THIS THE 12*\" DAY or FEBRUA:'3-.'f 4.:;'?.;0\u00a3:3\u00a7:   \"  \n\nPRESENT   % % % L\nms HON'BLE MR. JUS11CE_S.F{.\"  %\nTHE HGN'BLE MR. JUS\ufb01'\u00a3E A:.Ni..'.AVEI5i'!JAG{)PALAAAG{)WDA\n B:_   % \" % %\nNousHEERA;HAw;-Ea\"V ' 1' T \ns\/0 ABDU_\u00a3.__WA1ZVEEE:;$AE  k _   *\nAseoAaom%3a5veAR:s*  %\nAGRICULTURIST 's:.;au_sIN_Es_:;.____  \n\nR\/0 HosA;.u9E\"rE_ . .\nCHICKMAGALUR TALIJKV fa\n\n \n\n\n\n(NOW m JUDICIAL wsr\u00e9m\ufb01\n APPELLANT\n\nw'k%(%Eav  PASHA, ADV.)\n\n\n\n ' STATE OF KARNATAKA\n\" \"   EVA CHICKMAGALUR RURAL POLICE STATION\n'  . CHICi(!?1AGAl.UR TALUK & DISTRICT\n* (REPRESENTED 8Y LEARNED\n\n. f:S\"h\u00a7TE PUBLIC PRGSECUTOR)\n\n RESPONDENT<\/pre>\n
 .  ;(3v sax. s.a. mvm, 51>?)<\/p>\n
 to ‘corh’n1\u00a7t’.sui;ide  bathroom. After forcibly opening<\/p>\n
 rtloorgffrnrhetiieteiy, he along with others shifted her to
\n e4._’_”innocent.vo2’7 the crime alleged.<\/p>\n
.  —–.”:;e\\r_i_’:ilence, by the impugned judgment, rejectm the dying<\/p>\n
  fdeciaration at Ex.P-20 statement of the deceased when in<\/p>\n
After committal and oh\u00e9the basis of the charge.Veheet
\nmaterial, the three accused are charge sheeted
\nthey deny the charges and claim to he tried;   u
\nin S.C.No.115\/2006.   ‘A   it it <\/p>\n
In order to establish the.._guiit”‘of””the   it<\/p>\n
prosecution has relied upon  ilvjnarkeci<\/p>\n
Exs.P-1 to P-\u00bb28 and MO$.._1,:’teV  denying the
\nentire proseeo?tio}\u00a7.g A as  Eefterrlji questioning the
\naccused under   he has \ufb01led written
\n  _thet’erhile accused No.1 had
\nbeen to  three kms. away from the<\/p>\n
houseet gabotit .S.30v;  learnt that his wife had mm<\/p>\n
the hosp_itel: that he and his family members are<\/p>\n
  trial Court, on appreclatien of the entire<\/p>\n
5\/\/”\n<\/p>\n
ihfoifthe appeliant taking us through the entire<\/p>\n
H Vt .judgtfient;–.V:ofvconviction and sentence passed by the triai
\n isvcontrary to raw, evidence and facts of the case.
\n contended that admittediy, there were number cf<\/p>\n
Vt ‘:’_4:”dy’Ing deciarations said to have been made by the<\/p>\n
.. 7 ..\n<\/p>\n
injured condition and only relying upon Ex.P\u00ab-12 the dying<\/p>\n
deciaratien recorded by the Taiuka Executive Magietzetevv<\/p>\n
and Ex.P-17 intimation memo sent by the poi\ufb01iceh
\nhospital aiieged to be the history hgiyen by*’the’1i’i;iecea$ed ”
\ninjureci, though heid that there vsfezzcf nej<\/p>\n
us<\/p>\n
harassment caused by accus’e:i._VNoe*.-1″‘to <\/p>\n
demand of dowry end   committed
\nby any of the  p;un!;e_h:’a;bi.eien\u00a3\u00a3er–\u00a7ectlens 3, 4 and
\n6 of the heehfound the appeiient
\naione  oft’  Hence, the prment<\/p>\n
appeat x<\/p>\n
..  Sri. ‘\ufb02eshniath Pasha, {earned ceunsei<\/p>\n
e’vEde–nce” :’\\\u00a5ehe.,rfhen\ufb02y contended that the impugned<\/p>\n
\ufb01x”\n<\/p>\n
 V’ “elso”e’li3’pport’vthe ces\u00e9”that the deceased herself committing<\/p>\n
Veluicidge.  Ansubmitted that as the entire prosecution<\/p>\n
‘~.-v\u00ab._’__’deceasedgdiierself had committed suicide, there was no
\n   of accused being found guilty for the offence of
\n‘ V,.._’\ufb02ho_frzicidal death amounting to murder punishable under<\/p>\n
 . ufsection 302 IPC. on these among other grounds, it Is<\/p>\n
– 8 —\n<\/p>\n
deceased and three such statanents made at the <\/p>\n
point of time have erroneously been rejected  <\/p>\n
Court and it further committed an errmfin reiyin\ufb01fxgpoovtheve. ” it<\/p>\n
later dying declarations which
\nsuspicious circumstances. It ie  there
\nare contradictory dying’   ought
\nto have held that the AAc_a;_s’e._al\ufb01elnst”~~ti1Ae’._’;ve\u00e9cused is not
\nproved beyond:__”re\u00a7’3sonet!Ie  “isfunher submitted
\nthat the oniiijg.   in the form of
\ndaughte-froth  thewdeceased i.e., PW-2 has
\nalso not against the accused and on<\/p>\n
the other hend,_:Vhetv’-sta.ten?ient, if perused carefuily would<\/p>\n
material  the spot mahazar indicate that the<\/p>\n
tggvi”\n<\/p>\n
-11-<\/span><\/p>\n
‘7. At the outset, it is to be noted that  _<\/p>\n
of Nazeem Suithena on 9.2.2905 due  ‘:’K~Vi::l1jUr\u00a739V.\u00a5\u00a7 u .. <\/p>\n
sustained by her on 5.2.2005 is notT_mu:c.hz<\/p>\n
disputed is as to whether.’ she ACo.I_’nmitte.\ufb01”V’%’ <\/p>\n
contended by the defence  \\_afgtasV” as put
\nforward by the prosecu\ufb02fog. h  K 2′   <\/p>\n
8. Before\u00a5_consIt\u00a3-earthy}. hir:1v’:\u00a7’t’._oonit’etntions viz-a-viz
\nthe evidenceholhhhifeoorn}.it,  for us to ranind
\nourselves  or otherwise of the
\ndying aaeaarataonso g.ghte1m.mthe case of Khusbal Rae
\nv\/s so.:eoete\u00a2:aa:\u00a7ot;;\u00abs 1953 so 22), cause and
\nanother  afkeiastbaa (AIR 1974 so 2188),<\/p>\n
 gamma 9;; ststeor \ufb02aryotur (AIR use sc 1225),
\nt;a:m.st\u00a2zs or new (1.999 sec (cm) 1335), It<\/p>\n
  is uao amth2a\u00ab.\u00bb if the dying decaaratson is untainted and<\/p>\n
 *–.’V:c\u00bbredible,vv(.A’.tourt can accept the same and only on the basis of<\/p>\n
  :.’it,hca.n’..’.–‘proceed to convict the person atleoed in the said<\/p>\n
  jlsuitzide note as responsible for the act.<\/p>\n
5\/”\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
– 13 –\n<\/p>\n
only material lw before us is the dying declaratian~sj:’e.n~dvv<\/p>\n
statements said to have been made by  <\/p>\n
herself in the form of Ex.P11 re__cerd_ed 1at”‘v5..\u00a79″”‘n.rnV.,  <\/p>\n
Ex.P13 recorded at 6.45 p.m., -Ex.P:2.0 rema etfxo”
\non 5.2.2006 and Ex.P17 recorciedon s.2.2aosa:..g.4o.
\nand Ex.P12, the dying dnederatio\ufb01-.reco_rded’ bylthe_VFTaiuka<\/p>\n
Executive Magistrate atvabiiut  on 8.2.2006.\n<\/p>\n
14. Applying the test [laid ..dot\u00ab:;;. in respect of<\/p>\n
acceptability or  ‘.stateinents or dying
\ndeclarations laid down in various
\nproneuncernentgs earlier: normally the Court in
\norder tosatisfy  was In a fit mental<\/p>\n
condition to”‘rna’i-zeie declaration leeks into medical<\/p>\n
 \u00abrecords thed”ear%l–est statements in the chronological<\/p>\n
iobyious reasons that as time lapsm, the<\/p>\n
condition ofivthei’ injured becomes critical and there is every<\/p>\n
 lvnosslbilltygofl the person being in the delirium state or she<\/p>\n
‘   tutored to sneak something which may not be true.<\/p>\n
2\/M<\/p>\n
 “{-oriayirnalsaccused ‘No’;2)’Vand sister-in–law (original accused<\/p>\n
 her on fire. Immediately thereafta, the<\/p>\n
v”‘~,-g_’__’TaAiuka ” .,iS3zecutive Magistrate, PW.10 has come into<\/p>\n
A 4’    According to the doctor immwiately afta the<\/p>\n
 it  was brought to the ward, she was subjected to
\n ctvenesection as there was dehydration and since em”<\/p>\n
– 20 –\n<\/p>\n
on fire. In the absence of any contra indicative material, it<\/p>\n
can be safely assumed that, at that stage, it was a case of
\ncommission of suicide by Nazeem suithana. It is
\nnoted that though initial allegations were onlyfof <\/p>\n
harassment and of offences under Dowry l’._Act  l <\/p>\n
only after complaint    offence
\nunder Section 307 IPC   Section 302
\nIPC came to be”   she was shined
\nto Manlpal     story takes turn.\n<\/p>\n
According”  who examined her
\non 8.2.2i)ad,’-the’  history of burns by pouring
\nkerosene}    (appellant), mother-in-law<\/p>\n
tidying declaration in true sense, recorded by<\/p>\n
– Q1 ..\n<\/p>\n
dif\ufb01cuity in breathing, she was also put on oxygen, anti-<\/p>\n
biotics and pain kilters were atso given to her. Imnedt\u00e9teiy<\/p>\n
thereafter, the Tatuka Executive Magistrate by  <\/p>\n
pm. has arrived at the scene and -he too   K  <\/p>\n
statement as per Ex.P12 in queetko:-hi  <\/p>\n
peruse! of this statement, esp9gIal!yvjth”e._S”‘ qt::esti’oh <\/p>\n
how she received injury and  fat ‘the  she V<\/p>\n
states as thus: _ _ _ _ . V
\n“4 new teed
\nmm    ij?$:bz:\u00a7>””‘\ufb01Qpeb 2.302%<\/p>\n
15. ssss ‘VVTh_iA:.s:’:’ steternjeht’ ‘nude.-.\u00absm that, while the<\/p>\n
 minor chitd, hardty of 7
\nmonths, itvV”Es_ statf$$ Vth’at;!’the acicused\/appellant and his<\/p>\n
 Aghothes she _s5ste”r hadvpoured kerosene and sa them on<\/p>\n
” -.SA1\u00a3-vr;)r~’!$i!’i\u00a7%y_ there are no burn injuries what so ever<\/p>\n
oh” .the   and this statement is in clear conflict<\/p>\n
 ‘ ‘with the Veyidehce of PW.2. In fact it is nobody’s case al<\/p>\n
pouring kerosene on herself and the present stand. ‘taken<\/p>\n
vlde Ex.P12 that It is the accused who set her  %<\/p>\n
pouring kerosene, that too, when she was  Ve.:rn.lnor  l <\/p>\n
child which has not received any-L:\n<\/p>\n
dying declaration suspicious.’  Thls._’\u00a3:enclesi’on. is  <\/p>\n
supported by the evidence  1dauV’gh.t_e’tr that
\nbefore going to bathronn1%.. “over the
\ninfant to her, then wentVv1in’si_de”__enYd  deer from
\ninslde. similegiyfthe stetenient”‘efl’the.’.ir\u00a7jured’ as noted In
\nthe intimation: to the police as per
\nEx.P17,.v:el%so”” besisllevnd hence we are more
\ninclined to VvecceptVVVthe~.ea’dleet.~*’version of the Injured as per<\/p>\n
Ex.P1;. and l4\u00a3:errobe.ratedV”elnd asserted further as per her<\/p>\n
“vV”*etetehi’etits in Exs;P’i’3’Vand 20 that the Kareem Sulthan<\/p>\n
 suicide and there was no homicidal<\/p>\n
at\u00a3aci< 5y the husband. As such the finding of the<\/p>\n
%\u00b0'~..\u00ab.._'_'Trial Ceurt1– in this regard without considering these aspects<\/p>\n
4    phiper perspective, we hold to be perverse and illegal.<\/p>\n
T 5\/<\/p>\n
-24-<\/span><\/p>\n
16. At this stage, the learned State .P”t2t:tic<\/p>\n
Prosecutor brought to our notice the    <\/p>\n
Court in the case of DALBIR smofu vs;s*r;ni1’tatotco.*:tgn;l=\u00bbc.;c’<\/p>\n
reported in 21304 (2) crime,s-471  to ooogooo  f<\/p>\n
though the ingredients of theu’Vl’of_lf’encesVtpuniishahie under
\nSections 382 and 306   under
\nSection 305 has been oooslooo  even
\nif it is held that; oooooosoooccoooaooolegulcloo, the cause
\nbeing the    the appellant, the
\nCourt sr\u00a7hoold_t and \ufb01nd him guilty of
\nthe offence!  IPC by suitably modifying<\/p>\n
the co.nviction’;\n<\/p>\n
t   ‘A\u00ab.3A{:e”‘~–a_re afraid to accept this contention. so far<\/p>\n
e’s~.t’h’e’aVl’l%’etlo.n\u00a7” of harassment, cruelty punishable uncle’<\/p>\n
V .vSectlon.4–9:!84;3tV’IPC, the Trial Court itself has given clean chit<\/p>\n
‘tthe_acc’ttsed and acquitted them. This acqulttai has been<\/p>\n
“challenged by the State and hence that \ufb01nding has<\/p>\n
T hecome \ufb01nai. It is to be noted that, persons commit<\/p>\n
62\/<\/p>\n
-25- <\/span>
\nwife by her husband or in-laws, due to dispute_sgor<\/p>\n
differences, without anything more, pursuant   <\/p>\n
wife commits suicide, it wilt not a’:t1:ract,the’~,ooiv”fence”V 7<\/p>\n
Section 304-B or 306 IPC.\n<\/p>\n
13. In the case of sonnet.’ttAi~-suAeMAtvs1 STATE
\nor HARYANA, reported inttgooa.}A1!i%,:tsct\u00a7k%’32o2, the Apex
\nCourt has held thet,._jn cgese   of suicide,
\nthere must be  of intimidation
\nor force,  seicirte is necessary. Hence,
\nthe contention =  “t<\/p>\n
:19. _ To nrove the offence of abetment to suicide,<\/p>\n
 V’  more in ‘t\ufb01e ‘form of some concrete and physical<\/p>\n
 the accused is required to be shown or<\/p>\n
 Adornittedly in the present case the accused had<\/p>\n
ieft for”h\u00a7_s~ estate in the a\ufb01ernoon Etseif and there was no<\/p>\n
  ,”‘\u00e9nAd5c_et:on whatsoever as to his alleged abetment. Hence,<\/p>\n
‘  find no merit In this regard as put forth by the learned<\/p>\n
 r ufstate Pubiic Prosecutor.\n<\/p>\n
gr”\n<\/p>\n
-27-<\/span><\/p>\n
20. After giving our anxious consideratioiiV:to7ij’ttie.<\/p>\n
entire material evidence avaiiable, we find   <\/p>\n
the accused cannot be convicted ‘i”foi’:”–A.A_tiie <\/p>\n
Section 302 rec as admittedly.\u00bb the v_deceavsedVV””‘h’erVsetf i l<\/p>\n
committed suicide and.\u00bb as such..’Ve_:th’e\u00bbs._coniiictionvvi of the
\nappellant for the offence” ivdeatiz amounting to
\nmurder punishabie   cleariy illegal
\nand liable    <\/p>\n
 “””    forwthe reasons stated above,<\/p>\n
the appeatisVailoitedii”th:e\u00abj’udgment of conviction and
\nsentence dated passed by the teamed Principal<\/p>\n
I-it’:3essiensi.._”Judge, HCh’ii\u00e9itamaga|ur in s.c.No.115\/zeoa is<\/p>\n
— giving bene\ufb01t of doubt, the accused<\/p>\n
I  semis acquitted.\n<\/p>\n
 A.  Since the accused is stated to be in custody,<\/p>\n
‘.’._’_.h7e.:sha’ll be released forthwith, unless he Is required in any<\/p>\n
T other case.\n<\/p>\n
\u00e9\/V”\n<\/p>\n
 13\u00aberK\u00a7f\/Ks}.\n<\/p>\n
-28..\n<\/p>\n
23. Registry is directed to commu’e\u00a7\u00a7’cata:VV:’V <\/p>\n
operative portion of this order to fa’\u00e9ii’itatg*’_.to V<\/p>\n
accused forthwith.\n<\/p>\n
1-12\/bb<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Nousheer Ahamed vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009 Author: S.R.Bannurmath & Gowda _ A’CEN1_T\ufb01ALV msow, “?\u00abAN_GAE_0RE) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT or KARNATAKA AT BANGALC)l\u00a7:E:__V:1′ DATED THIS THE 12*” DAY or FEBRUA:’3-.’f 4.:;’?.;0\u00a3:3\u00a7: ” PRESENT % % % L ms HON’BLE MR. JUS11CE_S.F{.” % THE HGN’BLE MR. JUS\ufb01’\u00a3E A:.Ni..’.AVEI5i’!JAG{)PALAAAG{)WDA B:_ […]<\/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-16983","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nNousheer Ahamed vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009 - 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\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Nousheer Ahamed vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-02-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-08-02T05:34:36+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\\\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Nousheer Ahamed vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-02T05:34:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1751,\"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\\\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009\",\"name\":\"Nousheer Ahamed vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-02T05:34:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Nousheer Ahamed vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Nousheer Ahamed vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009 - 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\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Nousheer Ahamed vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-02-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-08-02T05:34:36+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\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Nousheer Ahamed vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009","datePublished":"2009-02-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-02T05:34:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009"},"wordCount":1751,"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\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009","name":"Nousheer Ahamed vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-02-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-02T05:34:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nousheer-ahamed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-12-february-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Nousheer Ahamed vs State Of Karnataka on 12 February, 2009"}]},{"@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\/16983","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=16983"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16983\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16983"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16983"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16983"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}