{"id":181286,"date":"2009-08-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-08-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009"},"modified":"2017-05-13T11:14:51","modified_gmt":"2017-05-13T05:44:51","slug":"mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009","title":{"rendered":"Mustapha @ Muthu vs Shahul Hameed on 20 August, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Mustapha @ Muthu vs Shahul Hameed on 20 August, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCrl.Rev.Pet.No. 3751 of 2008()\n\n\n1. MUSTAPHA @ MUTHU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. SHAHUL HAMEED, AGED 41 YEARS,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.JOHN SEBASTIAN RALPH\n\n                For Respondent  :SMT.T.D.RAJALAKSHMI\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH\n\n Dated :20\/08\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                         THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.\n              = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =\n                           CRL. R.P. NO.3751 of 2008\n               = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =\n                 Dated this the 20th day of August,      2009\n\n                                  O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n<p>                                  &#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8211;\n<\/p>\n<p>\n      Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Public Prosecutor.<\/p>\n<p>      2.    This revision is in challenge of judgment of learned<\/p>\n<p>Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc-III), Palakkad in Crl. Appeal No. 192<\/p>\n<p>of 2005 confirming conviction but modifying sentence of petitioner for<\/p>\n<p>offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments<\/p>\n<p>Act. According to respondent No.1, petitioner borrowed Rs.3,00,000\/-<\/p>\n<p>from him on 15.7.2002 undertaking to repay the same within two<\/p>\n<p>months and on his demanding repayment after the said period,<\/p>\n<p>petitioner issued Ext.P1, cheque dated 24.9.2002. That cheque was<\/p>\n<p>dishonoured for insufficiency of funds as seen from Ext.P2. Service of<\/p>\n<p>notice on petitioner is proved by Exts.P3 to P5. Respondent No.1 gave<\/p>\n<p>evidence as P.W.1 and testified to his case. Though when questioned<\/p>\n<p>under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure petitioner has no<\/p>\n<p>specific case as to the transaction and            alleged execution of the<\/p>\n<p>cheque it was suggested to respondent No.1 when the latter was in the<\/p>\n<p>box that petitioner had borrowed Rs.25,000\/- and as security for that<\/p>\n<p>amount respondent No.1 obtained three signed blank cheques and one<\/p>\n<p>of those cheque has been misused.               Respondent No.1 denied that<\/p>\n<p>CRL.R.P. No.3751 of 2008<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                 -: 2 :-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>suggestion. Courts below found that due execution of the cheque is<\/p>\n<p>proved.    It is contended in this revision that due execution of the<\/p>\n<p>cheque is not proved.\n<\/p>\n<p>      3.    It is not disputed that petitioner had money transaction<\/p>\n<p>with respondent No.1 and it was in that transaction that cheque in<\/p>\n<p>question was given to respondent No.1          Though petitioner has a<\/p>\n<p>contention that amount borrowed is only Rs.25,000\/-, respondent No.1<\/p>\n<p>obtained three signed blank cheques and one of those cheques has<\/p>\n<p>been misused what is available is only          the suggestion put to<\/p>\n<p>respondent No.1 which he denied.         Petitioner did not reply to the<\/p>\n<p>notice in spite of the fact that a fairly big amount was claimed from<\/p>\n<p>him as per the cheque in question. Courts below found that there is no<\/p>\n<p>reason to disbelieve the evidence of respondent No1.             In the<\/p>\n<p>circumstances there is no reason to interfere with the conviction of<\/p>\n<p>petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>      4.    Learned magistrate sentenced petitioner to undergo simple<\/p>\n<p>imprisonment for nine    months and directed payment of Rs.3,15,000\/-<\/p>\n<p>by way of compensation to respondent No.1 under Sec.357(3) of the<\/p>\n<p>Code.   A default sentence of imprisonment for three months was also<\/p>\n<p>provided.   Appellate court while modifying the substantive sentence<\/p>\n<p>as simple imprisonment till rising of the court directed payment of<\/p>\n<p>compensation of Rs.3,50,000\/-    and modified default sentence as six<\/p>\n<p>CRL.R.P. No.3751 of 2008<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                   -: 3 :-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>months.     It is contended by learned counsel that there was no<\/p>\n<p>justification in the appellate court enhancing the compensation<\/p>\n<p>payable to Rs.3,50,000\/-. It is also contended that default sentence<\/p>\n<p>(six months) is illegal since at the time the offence was committed,<\/p>\n<p>maximum imprisonment that could be awarded was one year and<\/p>\n<p>hence default sentence cannot        be more than one fourth of such<\/p>\n<p>punishment.     Learned counsel requested that compensation payable<\/p>\n<p>may be modified.      It is also requested that considering the financial<\/p>\n<p>difficulties petitioner may be granted six months&#8217; time to pay<\/p>\n<p>compensation       and that petitioner may be permitted to pay the<\/p>\n<p>compensation directly to respondent No.1<\/p>\n<p>       5.    I have heard counsel for respondent No.1 on the<\/p>\n<p>submission of counsel for petitioner.        Learned magistrate after<\/p>\n<p>considering the amount covered by the cheque and all other relevant<\/p>\n<p>circumstances fixed Rs.3,15,000\/- as the compensation payable. On<\/p>\n<p>considering the submission of learned counsel         and all relevant<\/p>\n<p>circumstances I am satisfied that compensation payable can be fixed<\/p>\n<p>as Rs.3,15,000\/- as ordered by learned magistrate. I am inclined to<\/p>\n<p>grant time till 21.12.2009 to deposit the compensation.<\/p>\n<p>       Resultantly this revision petition is allowed in part to the<\/p>\n<p>following extent:\n<\/p>\n<p>CRL.R.P. No.3751 of 2008<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                   -: 4 :-<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                   (i)   While   retaining  the   substantive<\/p>\n<p>            sentence as      modified by the appellate court,<\/p>\n<p>            amount of compensation payable is modified<\/p>\n<p>            as Rs.3,15,000\/- (Rupees Three lakhs and<\/p>\n<p>            fifteen thousand only).\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>                   (ii)  Petitioner   is  granted   time    till<\/p>\n<p>            21.12.2009 to deposit compensation in the trial<\/p>\n<p>            court failing which he shall undergo simple<\/p>\n<p>            imprisonment for three month.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<pre>                   (iii) It is made clear that     it shall be\n\n            sufficient compliance with      the direction for\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>            deposit of compensation if petitioner paid<\/p>\n<p>            compensation to respondent No.1 through his<\/p>\n<p>            counsel in the trial court and respondent No.1<\/p>\n<p>            filed a statement in the trial court through his<\/p>\n<p>            counsel        acknowledging       receipt      of<\/p>\n<p>            compensation within the said period.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Petitioner shall appear in the trial court on 23.12.2009 to receive<\/p>\n<p>the sentence.        Until then execution of warrant if any, against<\/p>\n<p>petitioner will remain in abeyance.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>                                             THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n<p>\nvsv<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Mustapha @ Muthu vs Shahul Hameed on 20 August, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3751 of 2008() 1. MUSTAPHA @ MUTHU, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. SHAHUL HAMEED, AGED 41 YEARS, &#8230; Respondent 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE For Petitioner :SRI.V.JOHN SEBASTIAN [&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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-181286","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Mustapha @ Muthu vs Shahul Hameed on 20 August, 2009 - 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\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mustapha @ Muthu vs Shahul Hameed on 20 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-08-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-05-13T05:44:51+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mustapha @ Muthu vs Shahul Hameed on 20 August, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-13T05:44:51+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009\"},\"wordCount\":755,\"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\\\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009\",\"name\":\"Mustapha @ Muthu vs Shahul Hameed on 20 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-13T05:44:51+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mustapha @ Muthu vs Shahul Hameed on 20 August, 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":"Mustapha @ Muthu vs Shahul Hameed on 20 August, 2009 - 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\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mustapha @ Muthu vs Shahul Hameed on 20 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-08-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-05-13T05:44:51+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mustapha @ Muthu vs Shahul Hameed on 20 August, 2009","datePublished":"2009-08-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-13T05:44:51+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009"},"wordCount":755,"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\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009","name":"Mustapha @ Muthu vs Shahul Hameed on 20 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-13T05:44:51+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mustapha-muthu-vs-shahul-hameed-on-20-august-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mustapha @ Muthu vs Shahul Hameed on 20 August, 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\/181286","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=181286"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/181286\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=181286"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=181286"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=181286"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}