{"id":188436,"date":"2011-06-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-06-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011"},"modified":"2019-01-24T15:33:08","modified_gmt":"2019-01-24T10:03:08","slug":"appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011","title":{"rendered":"Appearance : vs Mr L.R. Dabhi on 17 June, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Appearance : vs Mr L.R. Dabhi on 17 June, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: J.B.Pardiwala,<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.MA\/5876\/2011\t 7\/ 7\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nMISC.APPLICATION No. 5876 of 2011\n \n\n \n=================================================\n\n\n \n\nMOHD.\nMUNAF @ MUNAF BATA S\/O ABDUL HAMID SHAIKH \n\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT\n \n\n=================================================\n \nAppearance : \nMR\nND NANAVATI, SR ADVOCATE, ASSISTED BY MR UMESH A TRIVEDI for the\nApplicant \nMR L.R. DABHI, ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent\n \n================================================= \n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 17\/06\/2011 \n\n \n\nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>\tRule.\n<\/p>\n<p> Mr L.B. Dabhi, learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on<br \/>\nbehalf of the respondent-State.\n<\/p>\n<p>2\tThis<br \/>\nis an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal<br \/>\nProcedure, 1978 in connection with offence registered at Kalupur<br \/>\nPolice Station vide C.R.No.I-9 of 2007 for the offences punishable<br \/>\nunder Sections 304, 338, 337, 427, 114 and 34 of the Indian Penal<br \/>\nCode read with under Section 267(1)(2) of the Bombay Provincial<br \/>\nMunicipal Corporations Act, 1950.\n<\/p>\n<p>3\tThe<br \/>\ncase of the prosecution, in brief, can be summarised as under:-\n<\/p>\n<p>4\tOriginal<br \/>\naccused No.1 shown in the charge-sheet bought a property bearing City<br \/>\nSurvey No.3605\/P situated at Saudagar&#8217;s Pole, Kalupur between Galli<br \/>\nNo.15 and 16 by way a registered sale deed and a Power of Attorney.<br \/>\nIt is the case of the prosecution that after buying the said<br \/>\nproperty, the structure which was standing was demolished and he<br \/>\nfloated a scheme of a residential apartment with ground floor plus<br \/>\nfive floors in the name of Sidika Apartments.   As per the plan, in<br \/>\nall 20 flats were to be constructed.   It is the case of the<br \/>\nprosecution that original accused No.1 floated the said scheme taking<br \/>\nthe accused applicant as one of the partners along with original<br \/>\naccused Nos.2 and 3.  As per the case of the prosecution, original<br \/>\naccused No.4 shown in the charge-sheet was working partner and<br \/>\noriginal accused No.6 is the Structural Designer.     It is the case<br \/>\nof the prosecution that before commencement of construction,<br \/>\nnecessary plans as per the rules and regulations were not placed<br \/>\nbefore the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and without getting the<br \/>\nplans sanctioned as per the rules and regulations, all the accused<br \/>\npersons commenced with the work of construction of the said building.<br \/>\n  It is also alleged that before commencement with the construction<br \/>\nno soil test was carried out to ascertain the capacity of the land to<br \/>\nhold the weight of the building.  It is also alleged that the<br \/>\nmaterials like cement, steel, etc. which were used were of a very<br \/>\ninferior quality.  It is the case of the prosecution that on account<br \/>\nof all these reasons the entire building, which was under<br \/>\nconstruction, collapsed on 28th January 2011 at about 7.45<br \/>\nAM in the morning.   As a result of the collapse, five persons<br \/>\nresiding in the vicinity got crushed under the debris of the building<br \/>\nand many others were rendered homeless due to extensive damage caused<br \/>\nto the adjoining houses.   As per the case of the prosecution, damage<br \/>\nestimated to the tune of Rs.67,20,000 was caused due to collapse of<br \/>\nthe building.\n<\/p>\n<p>5\tThe<br \/>\naccused applicant was arrested on 13th February 2011 in<br \/>\nconnection with this offence and subsequently was remanded to the<br \/>\njudicial custody.  The accused-applicant preferred bail application<br \/>\nbefore the trial court, which came to be rejected vide order dated<br \/>\n13th April 2011.  After rejection of the regular bail<br \/>\napplication by the trial court, the accused-applicant preferred the<br \/>\npresent application before this Court praying for bail.\n<\/p>\n<p>6\tI<br \/>\nhave heard learned Senior Counsel, Mr N.D. Navavati appearing with<br \/>\nlearned advocate, Mr Umesh Trivedi for the accused-applicant and<br \/>\nlearned APP, Mr Dabhi appearing for the State.\n<\/p>\n<p>7\tLearned<br \/>\ncounsel for the accused-applicant would submit that there is no<br \/>\nevidence to connect the accused-applicant herein with the alleged<br \/>\ncrime.  He would submit that there is no evidence to even prima facie<br \/>\nsuggest that the accused-applicant herein was one of the partners in<br \/>\nthe project and that he was visiting the construction site.  It is<br \/>\nsubmitted that the investigation is over and the charge-sheet has<br \/>\nbeen filed for the offences punishable under Sections  Sections 304,<br \/>\n338, 337, 427, 114 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with under<br \/>\nSection 267(1)(2) of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations<br \/>\nAct.\n<\/p>\n<p>8\tThe<br \/>\nmain bone of contention put forward by the learned counsel is that<br \/>\nidentically situated other co-accused have already been released on<br \/>\nbail.  He invited my attention to two orders passed by the trial<br \/>\nCourt releasing the co-accused on bail.  Counsel also drew my<br \/>\nattention to the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this<br \/>\nCourt releasing the original accused No.2, shown in the charge-sheet<br \/>\nwho is alleged to be the main accused.  Learned counsel made<br \/>\navailable for my perusal order dated 17th June 2011 passed<br \/>\nby the learned Single Judge of this Court ordering release of<br \/>\noriginal accused No.2 on regular bail subject to certain terms and<br \/>\nconditions.  Counsel, therefore, submitted that even on the ground of<br \/>\nparity the present applicant is entitled to regular bail pending<br \/>\ntrial.\n<\/p>\n<p>9\tPer<br \/>\ncontra, this application has been vehemently opposed by the learned<br \/>\nAPP, Mr Dabhi.   He submitted that the accused-applicant is one of<br \/>\nthe partners of the partnership firm, which floated the project of<br \/>\nconstruction of residential apartment consisting of ground floor plus<br \/>\nfive floors and knowing fully well that the plans have not been<br \/>\nsanctioned by the Corporation, soil test has not been carried out,<br \/>\nmaterials like cement and steel of good quality have not been used,<br \/>\nproceeded ahead with the construction of the building which collapsed<br \/>\non the fateful day in the morning hours taking lives of five innocent<br \/>\npersons residing in the neighbourhood.  He further submitted that as<br \/>\non today there are so many persons who have been rendered homeless as<br \/>\ntheir respective houses have been damaged extensively due to collapse<br \/>\nof the building and all those persons are taking shelter in a nearby<br \/>\nmunicipal school even as on today.  He, therefore, submitted that the<br \/>\npresent application deserves to be rejected.\n<\/p>\n<p>10\tI<br \/>\nhave given my anxious thoughts and considerations to the rival<br \/>\ncontentions of both the sides and I have also taken into<br \/>\nconsideration the entire case of the prosecution as reflected from<br \/>\nthe papers of the charge-sheet.\n<\/p>\n<p>11\tPrima<br \/>\nfacie, I am of the view that the learned APP is justified to a<br \/>\ncertain extent in offering the resistance while opposing the present<br \/>\nbail application, taking into consideration the manner in which the<br \/>\nwhole incident occurred and also taking into consideration the fact<br \/>\nthat five innocent persons lost their lives and many more are<br \/>\nrendered homeless.    However, on account of the fact that a<br \/>\ncoordinate bench of this Court has thought fit to release original<br \/>\naccused No.2 on bail, then, in that case the present<br \/>\naccused-applicant would also be entitled for bail pending trial.   I<br \/>\nam conscious of the fact that liberty is to be secured through<br \/>\nprocess of law, which is administered  keeping in mind the interests<br \/>\nof the accused, the near and dear of the victims who lost their lives<br \/>\nand who feel helpless that there is no justice in the world as also<br \/>\ncollective interest of the community so that parties do not lose<br \/>\nfaith in the institution and indulge in private retribution.   I have<br \/>\nperused the papers of the charge sheet.  Prima facie, the allegations<br \/>\nagainst all the accused are at par.  I also concede to the fact that<br \/>\nprima facie, there is nothing substantial on record to show that the<br \/>\naccused-applicant is a partner and is vicariously liable for the<br \/>\noffence alleged to have been committed.\n<\/p>\n<p>12\tTaking<br \/>\ninto consideration the fact that the investigation is over and the<br \/>\ncharge-sheet has been filed and further practically all other<br \/>\nco-accused have been ordered to be released on bail, the present<br \/>\naccused-applicant can also be ordered to be released on bail subject<br \/>\nto certain terms and conditions.  In this view of the matter, the<br \/>\naccused-applicant is ordered to be enlarged on bail in connection<br \/>\nwith C.R.No.I 9 of 2011 registered with Kalupur Police Station for<br \/>\nthe offences punishable under Sections 304,<br \/>\n338, 337, 427 and 34 of the IPC as well as section 267(1)(2) of the<br \/>\nBombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, on furnishing   bond of<br \/>\nRs.25,000\/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) with one surety of the<br \/>\nlike amount to the satisfaction of the lower Court and on conditions<br \/>\nthat the applicant shall :\n<\/p>\n<p>[a]\tnot take<br \/>\nundue advantage of liberty or abuse liberty;\n<\/p>\n<p>[b]\tnot act in<br \/>\na manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution;\n<\/p>\n<p>[c]\tmaintain<br \/>\nlaw and order;\n<\/p>\n<p>[d]\tmark<br \/>\npresence before the concerned  Police Station on every 1st<br \/>\nand 15th day of English Calender month between  11.00 a.m.<br \/>\nand 2 p.m till commencement of the trial.\n<\/p>\n<p>[e]\tnot leave<br \/>\nthe State of Gujarat without prior permission of the Sessions \tJudge<br \/>\nconcerned;\n<\/p>\n<p>[f]\tfurnish the<br \/>\naddress of residence at the time of execution of the bail bond and<br \/>\nshall not change the residence without prior permission of  this<br \/>\nCourt;\n<\/p>\n<p>[g]\tsurrender<br \/>\npassport, if any, to the Lower Court immediately;\n<\/p>\n<p>[h]\tshall not<br \/>\nenter into Ahmedabad city for a period of 3 months except for the<br \/>\npurpose of attending the trial in the court of City Sessions Judge,<br \/>\nBhadra, Ahmedabad and for marking his presence before the concerned<br \/>\npolice station;\n<\/p>\n<p>13\tIf<br \/>\nbreach of any of the above conditions is committed,  the Sessions<br \/>\nJudge concerned will be free  to take appropriate action in the<br \/>\nmatter.\n<\/p>\n<p>14\tBail<br \/>\nbefore the Lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case.\n<\/p>\n<p>15\tBefore<br \/>\nconcluding, I am of the view that the matter does not rest hear with<br \/>\nthe order of bail in favour of the accused-applicant.  Now, since all<br \/>\naccused-applicants are practically on bail, the trial will not be<br \/>\ngiven priority as priority will be given to the matters where accused<br \/>\nhave not been released on bail.  This is suggestive of the fact that<br \/>\nin the present case we do not know when the trial would commence and<br \/>\nwhen it would conclude.  Ordinarily, if the accused persons are on<br \/>\nbail, commencement of the trial is always at a later stage as<br \/>\npriority is given to under-trial prisoners who are not on bail.<br \/>\nHowever, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, nature<br \/>\nof the offence and also taking into consideration the fact that five<br \/>\npersons lost their life and many more are rendered homeless and are<br \/>\ntaking shelter as on today in a municipal school premises, I deem fit<br \/>\nand proper to direct the concerned trial court to commence with the<br \/>\ntrial of the present case as early as possible so that in the event<br \/>\nif the prosecution is able to prove the case against the accused<br \/>\npersons, necessary orders as regards compensation can also be passed<br \/>\nunder the provisions of Section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal<br \/>\nProcedure.   In this view of the matter, the following directions are<br \/>\nissued:-\n<\/p>\n<p>(a)\tThe concerned trial<br \/>\nCourt is directed to see that charge is framed against each of the<br \/>\naccused persons within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt<br \/>\nof this order.\n<\/p>\n<p>(b)\tthe trial court would<br \/>\ntake care to avoid granting any undue adjournments unless it becomes<br \/>\nabsolutely imperative.\n<\/p>\n<p>(c)\tAfter the appropriate<br \/>\ncharge is framed against the accused-applicant and other co-accused,<br \/>\ntrial Court is directed to take trial on day-today basis as early as<br \/>\npossible and conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, in any<br \/>\nevent, on or before 31st October 2011.\n<\/p>\n<p>(d)\tParties are directed to<br \/>\nexamine the material and most essential witnesses and they will<br \/>\ncooperate with the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>16\tIt<br \/>\ngoes without saying that observations touching the merits of the case<br \/>\nare purely for the purpose of deciding the question of grant of bail<br \/>\npending trial and shall not be construed as an expression of the<br \/>\nfinal opinion in the main matter.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tWith<br \/>\nthese directions, application is allowed.  Rule is made absolute.<br \/>\nDirect Service is permitted.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tRegistry<br \/>\nis directed to forward a copy of this order to the Principal Judge,<br \/>\nCity Civil and Sessions Court, Bhadra, Ahmedabad so that necessary<br \/>\norders on administrative side can be passed in this regard to give<br \/>\neffect to the directions issued by this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(J.B.Pardiwala,<br \/>\nJ.)<\/p>\n<p>*mohd<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Appearance : vs Mr L.R. Dabhi on 17 June, 2011 Author: J.B.Pardiwala, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.MA\/5876\/2011 7\/ 7 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 5876 of 2011 ================================================= MOHD. MUNAF @ MUNAF BATA S\/O ABDUL HAMID SHAIKH Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ================================================= [&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":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-188436","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Appearance : vs Mr L.R. Dabhi on 17 June, 2011 - 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\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Appearance : vs Mr L.R. Dabhi on 17 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-06-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-01-24T10:03:08+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Appearance : vs Mr L.R. Dabhi on 17 June, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-06-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-24T10:03:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1938,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011\",\"name\":\"Appearance : vs Mr L.R. Dabhi on 17 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-06-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-24T10:03:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Appearance : vs Mr L.R. Dabhi on 17 June, 2011\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Appearance : vs Mr L.R. Dabhi on 17 June, 2011 - 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\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Appearance : vs Mr L.R. Dabhi on 17 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-06-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-01-24T10:03:08+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Appearance : vs Mr L.R. Dabhi on 17 June, 2011","datePublished":"2011-06-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-24T10:03:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011"},"wordCount":1938,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011","name":"Appearance : vs Mr L.R. Dabhi on 17 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-06-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-24T10:03:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-mr-l-r-dabhi-on-17-june-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Appearance : vs Mr L.R. Dabhi on 17 June, 2011"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/188436","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=188436"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/188436\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=188436"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=188436"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=188436"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}