{"id":185636,"date":"2007-07-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-07-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007"},"modified":"2015-07-24T19:45:37","modified_gmt":"2015-07-24T14:15:37","slug":"iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007","title":{"rendered":"Iddar &amp; Ors vs Aabida &amp; Anr on 25 July, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Iddar &amp; Ors vs Aabida &amp; Anr on 25 July, 2007<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: . A Pasayat<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, D.K. Jain<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (crl.)  934 of 2007\n\nPETITIONER:\nIddar &amp; Ors.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nAabida &amp; Anr.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 25\/07\/2007\n\nBENCH:\nDr. ARIJIT PASAYAT &amp; D.K. JAIN\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n<p>CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.    934         OF 2007<br \/>\n(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.1805 of 2006)<\/p>\n<p>Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>1.\tLeave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tChallenge in this appeal is to the order passed by a<br \/>\nlearned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur<br \/>\nBench dated 20.2.2006 passed under Section 482 of the Code<br \/>\nof Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the &#8216;Code&#8217;) and order<br \/>\ndated 2.3.2006 refusing to recall the said order i.e. 20.2.2006.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tBackground facts need to be noted in brief.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tOn 17.2.2005 the elder sister of the complainant lodged a<br \/>\ncomplaint before the police station alleging that she was<br \/>\nmarried to one Shri Sakeel. After sometime, the family of the<br \/>\nhusband of her sister started demanding dowry and torturing<br \/>\nher.  When the complainant went to meet her sister, she saw<br \/>\nseveral wounds on her person.  It was stated that both sisters<br \/>\nwere beaten and the complainant was raped by her family<br \/>\nmembers and friends of in-laws.  First Information Report (in<br \/>\nshort the &#8216;FIR&#8217;) was lodged for alleged commission of offences<br \/>\npunishable under Section 498A, 406 of the Indian Penal Code,<br \/>\n1860 in short the &#8216;IPC&#8217;).  Since no case was found for  alleged<br \/>\ncommission of offence punishable under Section 376 IPC, the<br \/>\nsaid offence was not registered.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tAnother complaint was lodged on 24.4.2005 in respect of<br \/>\nthe same alleged event in another police station where the<br \/>\ncase was registered for alleged commission of offence under<br \/>\nSection 376 read with Section 120B IPC.  The appellants were<br \/>\narrested and an application for bail was moved.  The High<br \/>\nCourt rejected the bail application. According to the appellant<br \/>\nmatter was amicably settled and the complainant appeared<br \/>\nbefore the trial court and her statement was recorded. Her<br \/>\nstatement was at variance with the statement recorded during<br \/>\ninvestigation. Thereafter an application in terms of Section<br \/>\n311 of the Code was filed requesting for recording statement of<br \/>\nthe complainant afresh.  This according to the appellants was<br \/>\nat the behest of some local persons and enemies of the<br \/>\nappellants.  The trial court by Order dated 13.1.2006 held that<br \/>\nit was a case where prosecution was trying to fill up lacunae of<br \/>\nprosecution version and it was rejected.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tRespondent No.1 preferred application under Section 482<br \/>\nof the Code for setting aside the order of the trial court.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tOn 20th February, 2006 the application was allowed.<br \/>\nThereafter an application was filed to recall the said order as<br \/>\nno notice was issued to respondents in the petition. They also<br \/>\nfiled an application to be impleaded. The High Court by order<br \/>\ndated 2.3.2006 rejected the application filed to recall the order<br \/>\ndated 20.2.2006.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tIn support of the appeal, learned counsel for the<br \/>\nappellants submitted that the High Court&#8217;s orders cannot be<br \/>\nmaintained because no reason has been indicated as to why<br \/>\nthe order of the trial court rejecting the prayer in terms of<br \/>\nSection 311 of the Code was set aside.  It was also submitted<br \/>\nthat since no notice has been issued to the appellants before<br \/>\nthe order was passed, the High Court erroneously rejected the<br \/>\nprayer to recall the order.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tLearned counsel for the respondent No.1 however<br \/>\nsubmitted that this is a case where the High Court&#8217;s order<br \/>\ncannot be faulted even though when the first order was passed<br \/>\non 20th February, 2006, no notice had been issued to the<br \/>\nappellants. They had sought to be impleaded on their own<br \/>\nmotion before the order rejecting the prayer for recalling the<br \/>\norder was passed.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tIn this context, reference may be made to Section 311 of<br \/>\nthe Code which reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;311. Power to summon material witness, or<br \/>\nexamine person present.\n<\/p>\n<p>Any Court may, at any stage of any inquiry,<br \/>\ntrial or other proceeding under this Code,<br \/>\nsummon any person as a witness or examine<br \/>\nany person in attendance, though not<br \/>\nsummoned as a witness or recall and re-\n<\/p>\n<p>examine any person already examined, and the<br \/>\nCourt shall summon and examine or recall<br \/>\nand re-examine any such person if his<br \/>\nevidence appears to it to be essential to the<br \/>\njust decision of the case.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tThe section is manifestly in two parts. Whereas the word<br \/>\nused in the first part is &#8220;may&#8221;, the second part uses &#8220;shall&#8221;. In<br \/>\nconsequence, the first part gives purely discretionary authority<br \/>\nto a Criminal Court and enables it at any stage of an enquiry,<br \/>\ntrial or proceeding under the Code : (a) to summon any one as<br \/>\na witness, or (b) to examine any person present in Court, or (c)<br \/>\nto recall and re-examine any person whose evidence has<br \/>\nalready been recorded. On the other hand, the second part is<br \/>\nmandatory and compels the Court to take any of the<br \/>\naforementioned steps if the new evidence appears to it<br \/>\nessential to the just decision of the case. This is a<br \/>\nsupplementary provision enabling, and in certain<br \/>\ncircumstances imposing on the Court the duty of examining a<br \/>\nmaterial witness who would not be otherwise brought before it.<br \/>\nIt is couched in the widest possible terms and calls for no<br \/>\nlimitation, either with regard to the stage at which the powers<br \/>\nof the Court should be exercised, or with regard to the manner<br \/>\nin which it should be exercised. It is not only the prerogative<br \/>\nbut also the plain duty of a Court to examine such of those<br \/>\nwitnesses as it considers absolutely necessary for doing justice<br \/>\nbetween the State and the subject. There is a duty cast upon<br \/>\nthe Court to arrive at the truth by all lawful means and one of<br \/>\nsuch means is the examination of witnesses of its own accord<br \/>\nwhen for certain obvious reasons either party is not prepared<br \/>\nto call witnesses who are known to be in a position to speak<br \/>\nimportant relevant facts.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\t The object underlying Section 311 of the Code is that<br \/>\nthere may not be failure of justice on account of mistake of<br \/>\neither party in bringing the valuable evidence on record or<br \/>\nleaving ambiguity in the statements of the witnesses examined<br \/>\nfrom either side. The determinative factor is whether it is<br \/>\nessential to the just decision of the case. The section is not<br \/>\nlimited only for the benefit of the accused, and it will not be an<br \/>\nimproper exercise of the powers of the Court to summon a<br \/>\nwitness under the Section merely because the evidence<br \/>\nsupports the case for the prosecution and not that of the<br \/>\naccused. The section is a general section which applies to all<br \/>\nproceedings, enquiries and trials under the Code and<br \/>\nempowers Magistrate to issue summons to any witness at any<br \/>\nstage of such proceedings, trial or enquiry. In Section 311 the<br \/>\nsignificant expression that occurs is &#8220;at any stage of inquiry or<br \/>\ntrial or other proceeding under this Code&#8221;. It is, however, to be<br \/>\nborne in mind that whereas the section confers a very wide<br \/>\npower on the Court on summoning witnesses, the discretion<br \/>\nconferred is to be exercised judiciously, as the wider the power<br \/>\nthe greater is the necessity for application of judicial mind.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\t As indicated above, the Section is wholly discretionary.<br \/>\nThe second part of it imposes upon the Magistrate an<br \/>\nobligation: it is, that the Court shall summon and examine all<br \/>\npersons whose evidence appears to be essential to the just<br \/>\ndecision of the case. It is a cardinal rule in the law of evidence<br \/>\nthat the best available evidence should be brought before the<br \/>\nCourt. Sections 60, 64 and 91 of the Indian Evidence Act,<br \/>\n1872 (in short, &#8216;Evidence Act&#8217;) are based on this rule. The<br \/>\nCourt is not empowered under the provisions of the Code to<br \/>\ncompel either the prosecution or the defence to examine any<br \/>\nparticular witness or witnesses on their side. This must be left<br \/>\nto the parties. But in weighing the evidence, the Court can<br \/>\ntake note of the fact that the best available evidence has not<br \/>\nbeen given, and can draw an adverse inference. The Court will<br \/>\noften have to depend on intercepted allegations made by the<br \/>\nparties, or on inconclusive inference from facts elicited in the<br \/>\nevidence. In such cases, the Court has to act under the second<br \/>\npart of the section. Sometimes the examination of witnesses as<br \/>\ndirected by the Court may result in what is thought to be<br \/>\n&#8220;filling of loopholes&#8221;. That is purely a subsidiary factor and<br \/>\ncannot be taken into account. Whether the new evidence is<br \/>\nessential or not, must of course depend on the facts of each<br \/>\ncase, and has to be determined by the Presiding Judge.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.\t The object of the Section 311 is to bring on record<br \/>\nevidence not only from the point of view of the accused and the<br \/>\nprosecution but also from the point of view of the orderly<br \/>\nsociety. If a witness called by Court gives evidence against the<br \/>\ncomplainant he should be allowed an opportunity to cross-<br \/>\nexamine. The right to cross-examine a witness who is called by<br \/>\na Court arises not under the provision of Section 311, but<br \/>\nunder the Evidence Act which gives a party the right to cross-<br \/>\nexamine a witness who is not his own witness. Since a witness<br \/>\nsummoned by the Court could not be termed a witness of any<br \/>\nparticular party, the Court should give the right of cross-<br \/>\nexamination to the complainant. These aspects were<br \/>\nhighlighted in Jagat Rai v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1968 SC\n<\/p>\n<p>178.<\/p>\n<p>14.\tIt is undisputed that the appellants were not heard<br \/>\nbefore the order dated 20.2.2006 was passed. A specific<br \/>\nground taken in application to recall the order was that even<br \/>\nno notice was issued and they were not impleaded as parties.<br \/>\nIt appears to have been brought to notice of the High Court<br \/>\nthat the appellants were heard before the trial court when the<br \/>\napplication in terms of Section 311 of the Code was decided by<br \/>\nthe trial court. It is true that the High Court has no power to<br \/>\nreview\/recall its order. But in view of the peculiar factual<br \/>\nscenario highlighted above, we set aside the order dated 20th<br \/>\nFebruary, 2006. The petition filed by the respondent No.1<br \/>\nshall be heard on merits.\n<\/p>\n<p>15.\tIt is stated that the appellants have already been<br \/>\nimpleaded in the application. If that is so, there shall be no<br \/>\nneed of respondents being impleaded.  If it has not been done,<br \/>\nthe same shall be done.  We make it clear that we do not<br \/>\nexpress any opinion on the merits of the case.\n<\/p>\n<p>16.\tAppeal is allowed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Iddar &amp; Ors vs Aabida &amp; Anr on 25 July, 2007 Author: . A Pasayat Bench: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, D.K. Jain CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 934 of 2007 PETITIONER: Iddar &amp; Ors. RESPONDENT: Aabida &amp; Anr. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 25\/07\/2007 BENCH: Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT &amp; D.K. JAIN JUDGMENT: J U D [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-185636","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Iddar &amp; Ors vs Aabida &amp; Anr on 25 July, 2007 - 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\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Iddar &amp; Ors vs Aabida &amp; Anr on 25 July, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-07-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-07-24T14:15:37+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\\\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Iddar &amp; Ors vs Aabida &amp; Anr on 25 July, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-07-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-24T14:15:37+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1733,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007\",\"name\":\"Iddar &amp; Ors vs Aabida &amp; Anr on 25 July, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-07-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-24T14:15:37+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Iddar &amp; Ors vs Aabida &amp; Anr on 25 July, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"Iddar &amp; Ors vs Aabida &amp; Anr on 25 July, 2007 - 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\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Iddar &amp; Ors vs Aabida &amp; Anr on 25 July, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-07-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-07-24T14:15:37+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\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Iddar &amp; Ors vs Aabida &amp; Anr on 25 July, 2007","datePublished":"2007-07-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-24T14:15:37+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007"},"wordCount":1733,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007","name":"Iddar &amp; Ors vs Aabida &amp; Anr on 25 July, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-07-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-24T14:15:37+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/iddar-ors-vs-aabida-anr-on-25-july-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Iddar &amp; Ors vs Aabida &amp; Anr on 25 July, 2007"}]},{"@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\/185636","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=185636"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/185636\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=185636"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=185636"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=185636"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}