{"id":178271,"date":"2008-09-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-09-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008"},"modified":"2017-03-21T08:56:39","modified_gmt":"2017-03-21T03:26:39","slug":"sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008","title":{"rendered":"Sri Ramesha vs The State By Jayapura Police on 25 September, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Sri Ramesha vs The State By Jayapura Police on 25 September, 2008<\/div>\n
Author: Arali Nagaraj<\/div>\n
I\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF I\u00a7:ARNA'1'AKA AT BANCrg\u00a7E;(}RE\n\nDATED THIS THE 25% DAY OF' SEWEMBER ?2'<};:s  \n\nBEFOREMH _  7 __\nTHE HONBLE MRJUSTJCE  '  J 7\n\n \n\nS\/0 Siddaiialaj,-""V_  % L     ,'\n\nAged a.bout~28   "  \n\nResic\u00a7.\u00e9ntT'of .(2hikI\u00a7\u00e911 1ra,1 Vi11ag\u00e9"\n\nHampap:ua.H01:;\ufb01 '%    ' '\n\nH.D.KGt,e Taluk     \n\nMysore I}ist1~ict\u00a7' %    _  ..PE'I'I'I'I(I)N}3)R\n\n..  (By S1'i;.I};C SIi1}1ivasa, Adv for\n\n' \u00a5$:i'i."\\Ii;1od Prasad, Adv)\n\n      \n\n'f'h.%:  State? };Jayapura Police\nRcpresmnted by\n\n   The State Public Prosecutor\n.. High Court Buildings\n' Bangalore. ...RESPONDEN'I'\n\n(By Sri: A.V.Ramakrishna, HCGP)\nqr-""'-$~b\\'""-*\\......\n\n\n\n2\n\nThis Cr1.RP is \ufb01led under Section sgfzig\u00e9irfuiiiiax\u00e9oi\n\nCIZPC praying to set aside the judgment arid  \ndated 27.03.2008 passed by the 11 Add}, 'District mid' \nSessions Judge, Mysore in Cr1,A..N_o.7'?'[2G07.  the  "\n\norder dated 03.02.2007 passccrby they JMFfC__.:(EE_\nMysore in co No.1414\/2005. - '  * 1 -  \n\nThis Cr1.RP coming onafor day, me ' ii\n\nCourt made the fo1Iow:'tng:~   '_\n \n\nPetitioner here'ir:1_,:"    in CC\nNo. 1414\/ 2oo5i'a;.n%th\u00a2\u00bb molar  JMFC, II Court,\nMysoro   to as "Trial Court" for short}\nhas "   and order of conviction\n\nanrisenmnce i.--1;;:oeci\u00abio3.o2.2oo7 convicting mm for the\n\nri .pii\ufb01is11able under Section 279 and 304A of IPC,\n\nH  h:'m:1 to undergo simple imprisonment for\n\n onio   the offence 21\/3 279 of H30 and to undergo\n\n \u00bb Sirnploiiiirnpzisonment for a period of 1 126 years for the\n\nAiofiierlce 11\/ s 304A of IPC. He has also challenged the\n\nHmiudment dated 27.03.2003 passed in Cr1.A.No.77\/2007\n\nby the learned II Addl. District and Sessions Judge,\n\n,,.....t'--'~""\n\n\n\n3\n\nMysore (hereinafter referred to as  \n\nshort) dismissing the said appeal and    \n\nJudgment and order of   _ \n\n2. Though this is'  fore"\n\nadmission, having regard  (gr 't:h.e.j\u00a7'udment\nimpugled and also    that lower Court\nrecords are xjeee-iv_ed,;:"_~1:pV'fcs\u00a3Vv'V\ufb01nal disposal by\nconsent   the petitioner and also\nlearned =  ':Vj'__Govemment Pleader. Their\n\na1'gume1its  merits. Perused both the\n\n , '_ judgxnents and also the entire material placed\n\n ' on r\u20ac0'?i"~"3-"Iv  \n\n:3; iiviaving heard the learned Counsel for both\n\n the ddpdafties, the only point that arises for my\n\n' '~\u00a7Ie'fei"'miI1ation in this appeal is:\n\n"Whether the Trial Court and the\nAppellate Court committed any ermr in\nrecording their \ufb01ndings that the\n\naccused cemmitted the offences\n\n xm\n\n\n\npunishable 11\/535 279 and 3O4AvVcf;f"'\u00bbe..\nIPC?" '   \n\nMy finding on this p<.)'im',-.i\u00e9s    '\n\nfor the following, V 2 2  A\n\n  3    \n4. The \ufb01ndings   well as\nthe Appellate Couzrl:  Vito:  of accident on\n\n29.07.2005<\/pre>\n
 g3.ooi[\u00a7 pom;  Baradanapura<\/p>\n
Villajie   ‘– H.D. Kote Road, the<\/p>\n
mvolvexliergi of reg\ufb01stration No.KA 22 —<\/p>\n
    t\u00a71eV.’Said;.._.acoident, the death of the deceased<\/p>\n
 c \u00abvg\u00a71:”1*e:s1.11t of fatal injuries sustained in the said<\/p>\n
  not disputed. The only disputed facts<\/p>\n
 a1’e”igh:$;1*\u00a3_ the petitioncpaccused was the driver of the<\/p>\n
V’ 5* eaiti~\u00ab_.vehic1e on the said date, time and place of accident<\/p>\n
   and he caused the said accident by driving the same in<\/p>\n
a rash and negligeot manner.\n<\/p>\n
g-~..(–“”””*’—–“‘<\/p>\n
S. Sri.D.C.Srinivasa, learned Couneel foi\ufb02\ufb02ie<\/p>\n
petitiorzepaccused, vehemently contended that’ iieigr<\/p>\n
identity of the accused as driver of the    we : <\/p>\n
relevant time and place of accident <\/p>\n
the prosecution and \ufb02ietefere,  ;<\/p>\n
the Trial Court as well as  this<\/p>\n
‘ petitioner was responeibie  the said accident<\/p>\n
cannot be sust.ei11ed._\u00bb\u00ab   ‘<\/p>\n
 c   learned HOG? — Sri A.V.\n<\/p>\n
Ramaldiehna  that though PW4 to 6 did not<\/p>\n
  the  as the driver of the said tempo at<\/p>\n
‘   of accident, the evidence of PWS. 9 and<\/p>\n
.  iaifewjrespectiveiy owner and cleaner of the said<\/p>\n
 teznpoi’ elearly establishes the fact that this petitioner<\/p>\n
V’  arias.’ tlie driver of the said tempo at that time. He<\/p>\n
 submitted that the petitioner–aecused did not<\/p>\n
offer any explanation in his statement recorded under<\/p>\n
Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and he did not speci\ufb01cally state<\/p>\n
(—-\u00bb.–….\u00a7_–~\\——..–r-“xx<\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
therein that he was not driving the said <\/p>\n
the relevant date, time and place of   <\/p>\n
therefore, the findings recorded’ “by*    ‘<\/p>\n
not call for any interference in  fe_vision,:_3  = *<\/p>\n
7. On ..evideiieeAVef I”-‘W4 to
\n6, the eye witnesses  it could be<\/p>\n
seen that PVi4″\u00ab\u00a7\u00a7e.s  ‘ei\ufb01ee the driver of the<\/p>\n
said     tnetc\u00e9nxpo, he could not know
\nhis name and eacidressgfe has stated that after he<\/p>\n
went 19 die  etafion, he came to know that the<\/p>\n
.– ~.    the dn'{ref ef the said tempo as Ramesh and<\/p>\n
    I’:e,’.1=went to the poiice station, the accused<\/p>\n
was ppeeefit there. Furizher, PW6 has stated in his<\/p>\n
  evideixee that he did not see as to who was the driver of<\/p>\n
”  tempo at the \ufb01me of accident, but he came to<\/p>\n
   ienow that it was Ramesh.\n<\/p>\n
r…..S’3″”‘*\\.——~.,.,…a<\/p>\n
7<\/span><\/p>\n
8. On careful reading of the evidenceefi<\/p>\n
the owner of the said tempo, it could be  <\/p>\n
has stated in clear terms t11a<'c't.his   its <\/p>\n
driver of the said tempo and   its  n <\/p>\n
PW 10 is the said   '  hisii<\/p>\n
evidence that on the ._1 ted  ago
\nat the afternoon,    accused were<\/p>\n
txaveiling    time, the said<\/p>\n
temp;-V = bywtiie accused and he was
\ncleaner;  He'   deposed that the accident<\/p>\n
occ1;m'ed eh tliathvidaty  Baladanapura Village and he<\/p>\n
'  _   eay  how exactly the said accident<\/p>\n
2  'It is pertinent to note that the above<\/p>\n
A 57 e\ufb01idence of PW10 in his examitnation-in–chief has<\/p>\n
ifemained totally unchallenged in his cross examination<\/p>\n
made on behalf of the accused. Further, as rightly<\/p>\n
submitted by the learned HCGP, the accused has not<\/p>\n
( <\/p>\n
8<\/span><\/p>\n
stated in statement recorded under  <\/p>\n
Cr.P.C. that he was not dI’iViI1g,.Ih_f;’2     <\/p>\n
the Ieievant date, time and  <\/p>\n
the contention of the iea1Tie,\u00a7i”~(3,ounee:l for d”dde\u00ab:.petitioner-‘V . L’<\/p>\n
accused that the very identit\ufb01 “of “t1_1e aceusediias being
\nthe driver of the said date, time a
\nplace of accident    eetab\ufb01shed by the
\npmsecution   \u00bb<\/p>\n
 ‘   etated in their evidence in<\/p>\n
clear teiiaed   was being driven by its<\/p>\n
 A_  at  and that after the tempo dashed<\/p>\n
 ‘  Karthik, the deceased was dragged<\/p>\n
.  atof about 35 feet and that the said accident<\/p>\n
 wae title  rashness and negligence on the part of the<\/p>\n
A 51” d\ufb01ver of the said tempo.\n<\/p>\n
11. On careful perusal of the cross examination
\nof these three witnesses made on behaif of the<\/p>\n
petitio:”1er-accused, it is seen that the above evidence of<\/p>\n
r…_..s””—–\\..—\n<\/p>\n
9<\/span><\/p>\n
these witnesses in their exa1niz1ation–iI1~chief..i\u00e93  the<\/p>\n
said tempo was being driven by its driver  <\/p>\n
and also negligently has  i<\/p>\n
being so, I do not find any   <\/p>\n
findings recorded by the  as aev;:AM\ufb01peHate V<\/p>\n
Court that the pIo\u00a7=;eeu\ufb01_oii’V_  its  beyond
\nreasonable doubt  that he
\ncommitted   the said
\naceideiitiii   tempo rashly and
\nnegligentiy es’ “Which the deceased Karthik
\nd.iec1:…–.o    t it <\/p>\n
  1:2;  to the sentence imposed on the<\/p>\n
H 1.\\etitioiie\u00a7?{:;\u00a7.ek3iised, learned Counsei for the petitioner<\/p>\n
  that one year simple imprisonment for the<\/p>\n
V’ V’ V. of\ufb01en\u00e9eeis under Section 279 of H90 and simple<\/p>\n
‘   for 1% years for the o\ufb01eraee under Section<\/p>\n
‘V 1304A of IPC Imposed on the petitlonenaocused by the<\/p>\n
Trial Court and con\ufb01rmed by the Appellate Court is very<\/p>\n
‘__’_____:””u-I—\\,__p4-6<\/p>\n
10<\/span><\/p>\n
harsh, in View of the fact that the accuseo ”   <\/p>\n
about 2’7 yeazs as on the date of <\/p>\n
he is not havizlg any  afiteeeoent’L’a\u00a7_mA~i\u00bb.;:e’V<\/p>\n
guilty of having committee!’ on any’<\/p>\n
previous occasion. .    the
\npetit:ioI1er~accused  children and
\nalso his par:;n\u00a7,\u00bbs_%:eand  x1.+e: is detained in jail
\nfor the    his entire family
\nwill regard to the facts and
\n   feel that the ends of justice<\/p>\n
wil}  mefg’    of imprisonment is reduced by<\/p>\n
 ‘-im”pn.sfn g seljltence of \ufb01ne.<\/p>\n
 IIV;*A;resu1t, this Criminal Revision Petition is<\/p>\n
 “%ffa1Iow\u00e9cs;m part. Whiie 1:nai.ntaim’ng the conviction of<\/p>\n
  petiiioner–aocused for both the offences under Sections<\/p>\n
VT  -“$79 and 304A of IPC, the sentence of simple<\/p>\n
imprisonment for one year imposed on him for the<\/p>\n
offence under Section 27 9 of IPC is hereby substituted<\/p>\n
C_ <\/p>\n
11<\/span><\/p>\n
with sentence of fine of Rs.2,000\/— only, <\/p>\n
undergo simple  for  <\/p>\n
Further, the sentence of iInpriso1’_jm:enfe\u00bb.for_:”lf\u00e9\ufb01ye\u00e9rs<\/p>\n
imposed on him for the oif\u00a2\ufb02=?e 1ir1d;’11’4  of V L’<\/p>\n
IPC is hereby redigced   fine of
\nRs.5,(}00\/~ is    for the said
\noffence in defagiit, to   for a
\nfurther    ”  out of the fine
\n   to the father of the
\ndeceased   Eight
\nweeks time is  the petitioner-accused<\/p>\n
to, ~deposi%;  fiiie \u00abamount.\n<\/p>\n
Sdfi
\nJudg\u00e9<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Sri Ramesha vs The State By Jayapura Police on 25 September, 2008 Author: Arali Nagaraj I IN THE HIGH COURT OF I\u00a7:ARNA’1’AKA AT BANCrg\u00a7E;(}RE DATED THIS THE 25% DAY OF’ SEWEMBER ?2′<};:s BEFOREMH _ 7 __ THE HONBLE MRJUSTJCE ' J 7 S\/0 Siddaiialaj,-""V_ % L ,' Aged a.bout~28 " Resic\u00a7.\u00e9ntT'of .(2hikI\u00a7\u00e911 […]<\/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-178271","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSri Ramesha vs The State By Jayapura Police on 25 September, 2008 - 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\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sri Ramesha vs The State By Jayapura Police on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-03-21T03:26:39+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\\\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sri Ramesha vs The State By Jayapura Police on 25 September, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-21T03:26:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1011,\"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\\\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008\",\"name\":\"Sri Ramesha vs The State By Jayapura Police on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-21T03:26:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sri Ramesha vs The State By Jayapura Police on 25 September, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Sri Ramesha vs The State By Jayapura Police on 25 September, 2008 - 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\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sri Ramesha vs The State By Jayapura Police on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-03-21T03:26:39+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\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sri Ramesha vs The State By Jayapura Police on 25 September, 2008","datePublished":"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-21T03:26:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008"},"wordCount":1011,"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\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008","name":"Sri Ramesha vs The State By Jayapura Police on 25 September, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-09-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-21T03:26:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sri-ramesha-vs-the-state-by-jayapura-police-on-25-september-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sri Ramesha vs The State By Jayapura Police on 25 September, 2008"}]},{"@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\/178271","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=178271"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/178271\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=178271"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=178271"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=178271"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}