{"id":184649,"date":"2008-11-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008"},"modified":"2019-03-31T16:38:40","modified_gmt":"2019-03-31T11:08:40","slug":"p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"P.C.Joy vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
P.C.Joy vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 November, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCRL.A.No. 648 of 2008()\n\n\n1. P.C.JOY, C.NO.5370,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SIJU.K. (STATE BRIEF)\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT\n\n Dated :11\/11\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                         R. BASANT, J.\n           -------------------------------------------------\n                   Crl.A. No. 648 of 2008\n           -------------------------------------------------\n        Dated this the 11th day of November, 2008\n\n                           JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
     This appeal is preferred by the appellant against the<\/p>\n
verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence imposed on him by<\/p>\n
the learned Sessions Judge in a prosecution under Sec.55(a) of<\/p>\n
the Kerala Abkari Act. He faces a sentence of rigorous<\/p>\n
imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of<\/p>\n
Rs.1 lakh and in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for<\/p>\n
a further period of three months.\n<\/p>\n
     2. The crux of the charge against the appellant is that he<\/p>\n
was found to transport in his possession 39 packets of<\/p>\n
Karnataka arrack through the check post at Baveli at 8.40 a.m.<\/p>\n
on 30\/3\/06. He was intercepted by P.W.1 – an Excise official.<\/p>\n
P.Ws.2 and 4 are Sales Tax officials at the check post who had<\/p>\n
witnessed the occurrence and had signed Ext.P2 seizure<\/p>\n
Crl.A. No. 648 of 2008        -: 2 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
mahazar as attestors.      P.W.3 is the Investigating Officer<\/p>\n
before whom the accused was produced after arrest along with<\/p>\n
the contraband article and the relevant documents.   Cognizance<\/p>\n
was taken by the learned Magistrate on the basis of the final<\/p>\n
report submitted by P.W.3 after due investigation. The case was<\/p>\n
committed to the Court of Session and at the Court of Session<\/p>\n
charges were framed against the appellant.       He denied the<\/p>\n
charges levelled against him and thereupon the prosecution<\/p>\n
examined P.Ws.1 to 4 and proved Exts.P1 to P7. M.Os.1 to 3<\/p>\n
were marked.    Altogether, there were 39 arrack packets, 37 of<\/p>\n
them are marked as M.O.2 series, two of them were opened and<\/p>\n
sample was drawn at the scene.        M.O.3 series are the said<\/p>\n
empty packets. M.O.1 is a towel which was used by the accused<\/p>\n
to conceal the packets of arrack by tying them to his body using<\/p>\n
the said towel.  I had already adverted to the nature of the oral<\/p>\n
evidence of P.Ws.1 to 4.   Ext.P1 is the arrest memo; Ext.P2 is<\/p>\n
the seizure mahazar; Ext.P3 is the occurrence report; Ext.P4 is<\/p>\n
the property list; Ext.P5 is the forwarding note and the<\/p>\n
requisition; Ext.P6  is the Chemical Examiner’s report       and<\/p>\n
Ext.P7 is the scene mahazar prepared by P.W.3.<\/p>\n
     3.    After the close of the prosecution evidence, the<\/p>\n
appellant was examined under Sec.313 Cr.P.C. In the course of<\/p>\n
Crl.A. No. 648 of 2008         -: 3 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
cross-examination and when examined under Sec.313 Cr.P.C.,<\/p>\n
the    accused denied all circumstances which appeared in<\/p>\n
evidence and which were put to him. No defence evidence was<\/p>\n
adduced.    Exts.D1 and D2 were marked in the course of cross-<\/p>\n
examination of P.W.4.    The appellant filed a statement in which<\/p>\n
also he denied all allegations against him.\n<\/p>\n
      4. The learned Sessions Judge, on an anxious consideration<\/p>\n
of all the relevant inputs, came to the conclusion that the oral<\/p>\n
evidence of P.Ws.1, 2 and 4 about the alleged seizure can safely<\/p>\n
be accepted. Accordingly, the learned Sessions Judge proceeded<\/p>\n
to pass the impugned verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence.<\/p>\n
      5. The appellant is in prison. The services of a State Brief<\/p>\n
counsel was made available to him. The learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellant has advanced his arguments. I have heard the learned<\/p>\n
Public Prosecutor also.     The learned counsel for the appellant<\/p>\n
assails the impugned judgment on the following grounds:<\/p>\n
      (i) The court below erred in accepting and acting upon the<\/p>\n
oral evidence of P.Ws.1 , 2 and 4.\n<\/p>\n
      (ii) The court below ought to have held that the alleged<\/p>\n
seizure was not at a place within the State of Kerala; but outside<\/p>\n
the State – on the Karnataka side of the barricade.<\/p>\n
Crl.A. No. 648 of 2008         -: 4 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
      (iii) There has been no proper sampling done by the Excise<\/p>\n
officials.\n<\/p>\n
      (iv) The sentence imposed is excessive.\n<\/p>\n
      6. Coming to the first ground of challenge, we have<\/p>\n
satisfactory oral evidence of P.W.1 – an Excise official as also<\/p>\n
P.Ws.2 and 4 who are the officials at the sales tax check post at<\/p>\n
Baveli check post. The evidence of P.Ws.1, 2 and 4 clearly show<\/p>\n
the alleged seizure. I find no reason whatsoever to discard the<\/p>\n
oral evidence of P.Ws.1, 2 and 4. In fact, cross- examination of<\/p>\n
P.Ws.1, 2 and 4 do not at all reveal that they have any animus<\/p>\n
against the appellant or had any reason to falsely implicate him.<\/p>\n
Not even a suggestion is made as to why P.Ws.1, 2 and 4 must<\/p>\n
choose to speak falsehood against the appellant. The version of<\/p>\n
P.Ws.1, 2 and 4 is further corroborated by the contemporaneous<\/p>\n
documents – Ext.P1 arrest memo, Ext.P2 seizure mahazar and<\/p>\n
Ext.P3 crime and occurrence report.            I am, in these<\/p>\n
circumstances, of opinion that there is no worth or merit in the<\/p>\n
challenge raised on the first ground.\n<\/p>\n
      7. A contention is raised that the seizure must have taken<\/p>\n
place outside the barricade and hence within the territory of the<\/p>\n
State of Karnataka and outside the territory of Kerala.       No<\/p>\n
specific suggestion is seen thrown at P.Ws.1, 2 and 4 on this<\/p>\n
 Crl.A. No. 648 of 2008        -: 5 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
aspect.   The evidence is that the accused was walking towards<\/p>\n
the barricade when he was intercepted outside the barricade.<\/p>\n
The evidence clearly shows that the territory of Kerala does not<\/p>\n
commence at the Excise check post barricade and the barricade<\/p>\n
is within the territory of Kerala.    I am, in these circumstances,<\/p>\n
satisfied that the second ground of challenge raised is also<\/p>\n
without any merit. The same cannot be accepted.<\/p>\n
      8. The third ground of challenge is about the sampling.<\/p>\n
The evidence clearly shows that two packets were broken open<\/p>\n
to ascertain the nature of contents. Sampling was done using<\/p>\n
the contents of such two packets.         The empty packets are<\/p>\n
produced as M.O.3 series. The evidence of P.W.1 and Ext.P2<\/p>\n
seizure mahazar clearly show that the contraband article from<\/p>\n
the two packets were taken in a sample bottle and that was also<\/p>\n
seized under Ext.P2. A contention is advanced that the said<\/p>\n
bottle may have been impure and that may have affected the<\/p>\n
result of the chemical examination. P.W.1 is the Excise official.<\/p>\n
He has stated clearly that the contents of the packet was arrack.<\/p>\n
P.Ws.2 and 4 have also supported that version.         P.W.1 in his<\/p>\n
evidence stated that the bottle that was used was rinsed with<\/p>\n
the contents of the contraband article seized before the sample<\/p>\n
was poured into the sample bottle.             I do not, in these<\/p>\n
 Crl.A. No. 648 of 2008         -: 6 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
circumstances, find much merit in the contention that the sample<\/p>\n
bottle was not clean or dry and such inadequacy has affected the<\/p>\n
sampling done and the later analysis by the expert..<\/p>\n
      9. No other ground of challenge is raised.     I am satisfied<\/p>\n
that on the grounds referred above, the verdict of guilty and<\/p>\n
conviction do not warrant interference at all.<\/p>\n
      10. That takes me to the last contention that the sentence<\/p>\n
imposed is excessive. The total quantity of contraband liquor is<\/p>\n
3.9 litres.     The appellant is not shown to have any criminal<\/p>\n
antecedents also.         The learned counsel submits that the<\/p>\n
appellant remains in custody from the date of the judgment.<\/p>\n
According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the appellant<\/p>\n
was in custody pending investigation\/trial also for some period of<\/p>\n
time.   It is, in these circumstances, prayed that leniency may be<\/p>\n
shown on the question of sentence and it may be ensured that<\/p>\n
the appellant is not obliged to continue in custody any longer.<\/p>\n
The sentence imposed may be modified and reduced, it is prayed.<\/p>\n
      11.   The appellant is shown to be aged 64 years also.<\/p>\n
Taking note of the totality of circumstances, including the<\/p>\n
quantity of the contraband liquor involved as also the period of<\/p>\n
incarceration pending investigation\/trial of the appellant, I am<\/p>\n
satisfied that a lenient view can be taken on the question of<\/p>\n
 Crl.A. No. 648 of 2008        -: 7 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
sentence.    The sentence can be suitably modified and reduced.<\/p>\n
I note that the sentence of fine imposed is the minimum that can<\/p>\n
be imposed under law.\n<\/p>\n
     12. In the result:\n<\/p>\n
     (a) This appeal is allowed in part.\n<\/p>\n
     (b) The verdict of guilty and conviction of the appellant<\/p>\n
under Sec.55(a) of the Abkari Act are upheld.\n<\/p>\n
     (c) But the sentence imposed on the appellant is modified<\/p>\n
and   reduced.      The    substantive   sentence    of  rigorous<\/p>\n
imprisonment for a period of two years is modified and reduced<\/p>\n
from two years to a period of one year. The fine and the default<\/p>\n
sentence imposed –      fine of Rupees one lakh and rigorous<\/p>\n
imprisonment for a period of three months, are upheld.<\/p>\n
     13. A copy of this judgment shall be communicated to the<\/p>\n
court below and the prison authorities forthwith.          If the<\/p>\n
appellant has already served the modified sentence hereby<\/p>\n
imposed and his further detention is not required in connection<\/p>\n
with any other case, he shall forthwith be released from custody.<\/p>\n
                                                 Sd\/-<\/p>\n
\n\n                                        (R. BASANT, JUDGE)\n\n\nNan\/       \/\/true copy\/\/         P.S. to Judge\n\nCrl.A. No. 648 of 2008  -: 8 :-<\/span>\n\n\n\n\n                                         R. BASANT, J.\n<\/pre>\n
                          ——————————————–\n<\/p>\n
                                  CRL.A.NO.648 OF 2008\n<\/p>\n
                          ——————————————–<\/p>\n
                                         JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
                                  11th NOVEMBER, 2008<\/p>\n
Crl.A. No. 648 of 2008  -: 9 :-<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court P.C.Joy vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 November, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM CRL.A.No. 648 of 2008() 1. P.C.JOY, C.NO.5370, … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE … Respondent For Petitioner :SIJU.K. (STATE BRIEF) For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon’ble MR. […]<\/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-184649","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nP.C.Joy vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 November, 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\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"P.C.Joy vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-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=\"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-31T11:08:40+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"P.C.Joy vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-31T11:08:40+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1502,\"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\\\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008\",\"name\":\"P.C.Joy vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-31T11:08:40+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"P.C.Joy vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 November, 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":"P.C.Joy vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 November, 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\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"P.C.Joy vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-31T11:08:40+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"P.C.Joy vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-31T11:08:40+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008"},"wordCount":1502,"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\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008","name":"P.C.Joy vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-31T11:08:40+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/p-c-joy-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-11-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"P.C.Joy vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 11 November, 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\/184649","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=184649"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/184649\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=184649"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=184649"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=184649"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}