{"id":189345,"date":"1970-02-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1970-02-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970"},"modified":"2017-01-04T04:03:49","modified_gmt":"2017-01-03T22:33:49","slug":"govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970","title":{"rendered":"Govinda Kadtuji Kadam & Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 February, 1970"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Govinda Kadtuji Kadam & Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 February, 1970<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1970 AIR 1033, \t\t 1970 SCR (3) 525<\/div>\n
Author: I Dua<\/div>\n
Bench: Dua, I.D.<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nGOVINDA KADTUJI KADAM & ORS.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n09\/02\/1970\n\nBENCH:\nDUA, I.D.\nBENCH:\nDUA, I.D.\nRAY, A.N.\n\nCITATION:\n 1970 AIR 1033\t\t  1970 SCR  (3) 525\n 1970 SCC  (1) 469\n CITATOR INFO :\n F\t    1971 SC  64\t (2)\n R\t    1971 SC1606\t (19)\n R\t    1973 SC 243\t (4,5)\n RF\t    1974 SC 745\t (75)\n D\t    1974 SC1150\t (2)\n R\t    1981 SC1218\t (1)\n RF\t    1983 SC1014\t (2)\n R\t    1986 SC1070\t (2)\n\n\nACT:\nCode  of Criminal Procedure, (5 of 1898) &  417-High  Court-\nAppeal-Summary\tdismissal-Duty to indicate views  on  points\nraised.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe  four  appellants along with K, were jointly  tried\t and\nconvicted  for offences under s. 147 IPC.  They all  jointly\nappealed to the High Court by one memorandum of appeal.\t The\nHigh Court admitted the appeal on behalf of K, and dismissed\nin limine the appeal on behalf of the appellants.\nIn appeal to this Court, the appellants challenged the order\ndismissing  in limine the appeal on their behalf,  when\t the\nappeal of K, co-accused, was admitted for hearing on  merits\nafter notice to the State.\nHELD : When an appeal in the High Court raises a serious and\nsubstantial  point  which  is prima  facie  arguable  it  is\nimproper  for  that court to dismiss  it  summarily  without\ngiving\tsome  indication of its view on the  points  raised.\nThe interest of justice and fairplay require the High  Court\nin  such  cases to give an indication of its  views  on\t the\npoints argued so that this Court, in the event of an  appeal\nfrom that order being presented here, has the benefit of the\nHigh Court's opinion on those points. [527F]\nThis was an eminently fit case in which, while admitting K's\nappeal,\t the  appeal on behalf of the  appellants  was\talso\nadmitted  so that the appeals of all the five accused  could\nbe considered together.\t If K's defence was upheld, then the\ncase  against  the  appellants would  also  require  serious\nconsideration.\tThe evidence on the record would have to  be\nscrutinised at least for determining how far the case of the\nappellants is distinguishable from that of K. The charge  of\nrioting\t under\ts.  147 IPC could only be  sustained  if  an\nunlawful  assembly  was held to have been formed.   It\twas,\ntherefore, more appropriate to consider the case of all\t the\naccused\t together on appeal.  On this ground also the  order\nof the High Court. is open to objection. [528 G]\nMushtak\t Hussein v. The State of Bombay,<\/a> [1953] S.C.R.\t809;\nShreekantiah  Ramayya  Munipalli  v. The  State\t of  Bombay,<\/a>\n[1955]\t2  S.C.R. 1177; Chittaranjan Das v.  State  of\tWest\nBengal,<\/a>\t [1964]\t 3  S.C.R. 237; Ncrayan Swami  v.  State  of\nMaharashtra, AIR 1968 SC 609; Jeewan v. State of  Rajasthan,\nCrl.  A. No. 274 of 1968 decided on 18-12-1968; Sakha Ram v.\nState  of Maharashtra, Crl.  A. No. 258 of 1968\t decided  on\n22-4-69, referred to.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 188 of
\n1969.\n<\/p>\n
Appeal by special leave from the order\tdated  June 9,\t1969
\nof  the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench in  Criminal  Appeal
\nNo. 109 of 1969.\n<\/p>\n
W.   S.\t Barlingay, N. K. Kherdekar and A.  G.\tRatnaparkhi,
\nfor the appellants.\n<\/p>\n
G.   L.\t Sanghi, Badri Das Sharma and S. P. Nayar,  for\t the
\nrespondent.\n<\/p>\n
526<\/span><\/p>\n
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\nDua, J. The four appellants, along with Kondu son of  Anibu,
\nwere  jointly  tried  in the court  of\tAdditional  Sessions
\nJudge, Akola on the following charges :\n<\/p>\n
“That  you all accused nos.  1 to 5 on or about 12th day  of
\n\t      November, 1967 at about 5-45 a.m. near  Farshi
\n\t      on  Risod\t Nazampur Road, formed\tan  unlawful
\n\t      assembly\tand  in prosecution  of\t the  common
\n\t      object  of  such\tassembly viz.  :  to  commit
\n\t      murder  of  complainant  Vithalrao   Khanderao
\n\t      Deshmukh\tor  in\torder  to  cause  murder  of
\n\t      Vithalrao\t or grievous hurts to him  committed
\n\t      the  offence of rioting and thereby  committed
\n\t      an offence punishable under Section 147 of the
\n\t      Indian Penal Code and within the cognizance of
\n\t      this Court.\n<\/p>\n
That you all on the same date, time and place, were  members
\nof  unlawful  assembly, in prosecution of common  object  of
\nwhich  viz.  :\tto commit murder of Vithalrao  or  to  cause
\ngrievous  hurt to him, one or all you caused grievous  hurts
\nto  him which offence you knew to be likely to be  committed
\nin prosecution of the common object of the said assembly you
\nare  thereby  under  section 149 of the\t Indian\t Penal\tCode
\nguilty\tof  causing  of the said  offence  punishable  under
\nSection\t 307  of  the  Indian  Penal  Code  and\t within\t the
\ncognizance of this Court.\n<\/p>\n
That  you all on the same date, time and place attempted  to
\ncause murder of Vithalrao Deshmukh, in furtherance of common
\nintention and thereby committed an offence punishable  under
\nSection\t 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian\t Penal\tCode
\nand within the cognizance of this Court.”
\nThe  order of the trial court convicting them all  concludes
\nthus:\n<\/p>\n
“All  the  five\t accused are convicted for  the\t offence  of
\nrioting punishable under Section 147, Indian Penal Code\t and
\neach is sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for the period of
\nsix  months and to a fine of Rs. 501-, in default,  rigorous
\nimprisonment for two weeks for that offence.
\naccused shall surrender to their bail.”
\nThey all jointly appealed to the High Court of Bombay by one
\nmemorandum  of appeal.\tChandurkar, J., admitted the  appeal
\nonly  on behalf of Kondu and dismissed in limine the  appeal
\non
\n527<\/span>
\nbehalf\tof the four -appellants before us.  The\t only  point
\nwhich  concerns this Court in the present appeal by  special
\nleave relates to the correctness of the order dismissing  in
\nlimine the appeal on behalf of the four appellants, when the
\nappeal\ton  behalf  of Kondu, co-accused  was  admitted\t for
\nhearing on the merits after notice to, the State.
\nWe  may at the outset point out that though on appeal  under
\n410,  Cr.P.C.  by a person convicted at a trial\t held  by  a
\nSessions judge or an Additional Sessions Judge the appellant
\nis  entitled  under  s. 418 of the  Code  to  challenge\t the
\nconclusions  both  on  facts and of law and  to\t ask  for  a
\nreappraisal  of\t the  evidence,\t the  appellate\t court\t has
\nnevertheless full power under s. 421, Cr.P.C. to dismiss the
\nappeal in limine even without sending for the records, of on
\nperusal of the impugned order and the petition of appeal  it
\nis  satisfied  with the correctness of\tthe  order  appealed
\nagainst.   This\t power,\t it may be  emphasised,\t has  to  be
\nexercised after perusing the petition of appeal and the copy
\nof  the\t order appealed against and after affording  to\t the
\nappellant or his pleader a reasonable, opportunity of  being
\nheard  in  support of the appeal.  The summary\tdecision  is
\naccordingly  a judicial decision which vitally affects\tthe,
\nconvicted  appellant  and in a fit case it is also  open  to
\nchallenge  on  appeal  in this Court.\tAn  order  summarily
\ndismissing an appeal by the word “rejected”, as is the\tcase
\nbefore us, though not violative of -any statutory  provision
\nremoves nearly every opportunity for detection of errors  in
\nthe order.  Such an order does not speak and is\t inscrutable
\ngiving no indication of the reasoning underlying it. It\t may
\nat  times  embarrass  this Court  when\tthe  order  appealed
\nagainst prima facie gives rise to arguable points which this
\nCourt is required to consider without having the benefit  of
\nthe  views  of\tthe  High Court on  those  points.   In\t our
\nopinion, therefore, when an appeal in the High Court  raises
\na  serious  and\t substantial  point  which  is\tprima  facie
\narguable  it  is  improper for that  Court  to,\t dismiss  it
\nsummarily without giving some indication of its view on\t the
\npoints raised.\tThe interest of justice and fairplay require
\nthe,  High Court in such cases to give an indication of\t its
\nviews on the points argued so that this Court, in the  event
\nof  an appeal from that order being presented here, has\t the
\nbenefit of the High Court’s opinion on those points.
\nThe  question of summary dismissal of criminal\tappeals\t has
\ncome  up  for  consideration before this  Court\t on  several
\noccasions  and broad principles have been stated  more\tthan
\nonce.\tIn  Mushtak  Hussein  v.  The  State  of  Bombay<\/a>(1),
\nMahajan, J., (as he then was) speaking for the Court said at
\np. 820 :\n<\/p>\n
“With great respect we are, however, constrained to  observe
\nthat it was not right for the High Court to have
\n(1)  [1953] S.C.R. 809.\n<\/p>\n
528<\/span><\/p>\n
dismissed  the\tappeal preferred by the\t appellant  to\tthat
\ncourt  summarily,  -as\tit certainly  raised  some  arguable
\npoints\twhich  required\t consideration though  we  have\t not
\nthought\t it  fit to deal with all of them.  In\tcases  which
\nprima  facie  raise  no arguable issue that  course  is,  of
\ncourse, justified, but this court would appreciate it if  in
\narguable  cases\t the  summary  rejection  order\t gives\tsome
\nindication  of\tthe views of the High Court  on\t the  points
\nraised.\t  Without  the\topinion of the High  Court  on\tsuch
\npoints\tin  special leave petitions under Art.\t136  of\t the
\nConstitution  this Court sometimes feels embarrassed  if  it
\nhas  to deal with those matters without the benefit of\tthat
\nopinion.”\n<\/p>\n
In Shreekantiah Ramayya Munipalli v. The State of  Bombay<\/a>(1)
\nand  in\t Chittaranjan Das v. State of West Bengal<\/a>  (2)\tthis
\nCourt, approved the remarks made in Mushtak Hussein’s case (
\n3 ) . Again. in Narayan Swami v. State of Maharashtra<\/a> ( 4  )
\nthis  Court, after referring to the earlier three  decisions
\nof  this  Court, emphasised that the High Court\t should\t not
\nsummarily reject criminal appeals if-they raise arguable and
\nsubstantial points.  Still more recently in Jeewan v.  State
\nof  Rajasthan (5) this Court disapproved summary  -rejection
\nof the appeal by the High Court and in Sakha Ram v. State of
\nMaharashtra(6)\tthis  Court reiterated the view that  it  is
\ndesirable for the High Courts when dismissing the appeals in
\nlimine to deal with each point urged before them for holding
\nthat  it  is not -necessary to send for the records  and  to
\ngive  notice to the State for finally hearing and  disposing
\nof the appeal.\n<\/p>\n
In  the\t present case the defence of Kondu accused  is\tthat
\nVithalrao,  the injured person, has sustained the injury  by
\nfalling\t on a stone while chasing him (Kondu) and his  other
\ncompanions.  If that defence is upheld then the case against
\nthe  four  appellants in this Court would, in  our  opinion,
\nalso  require  serious consideration.  The evidence  on\t the
\nrecord would have to be scrutinised at least for determining
\nhow  far the case of the present appellants is\tdistinguish-
\nable  from  that of Kondu, accused.  It was,  therefore,  an
\neminently fit case in which, while admitting Kondu’s appeal,
\nthe  appeal  on behalf of the present  appellants  was\talso
\nadmitted  so that the appeals of all the five accused  could
\nbe considered together.\t It may be recalled that the  charge
\nof  rioting under s. 147, I.P.C. could only be sustained  if
\nan  unlawful assembly is held to have been formed.  It\twas,
\ntherefore, more appropriate to consider the case of all\t the
\naccused together on appeal.  On this ground also the
\n(1)[1955]  2  S.C.R. 1177.\n<\/p>\n
(2) [1964] 3 S. C.  R.\t237.\n<\/p>\n
(3)  [1953] S.C.R. 809.\n<\/p>\n
(4) A. 1. R. 1968 S.C. 609.\n<\/p>\n
(5)  Cr. A. No. 274 of 1968 decided on 18.12.68.
\n(6)  Cr. A. No- 258 of 1968 decided on 22.4.69.\n<\/p>\n
529<\/span><\/p>\n
order  of  the High Court is open to  objection.   Even\t the
\ncounsel for the State before us after making a faint attempt
\nto  justify  the  impugned  order had, it  may\tbe  said  in
\nfairness  to him, to concede that the order of dismissal  in
\nlimine of the appeal on behalf of the four appellants is, in
\nthe circumstances, insupportable.\n<\/p>\n
The appeal is allowed and the order dismissing in limine the
\nappeal of the four appellants before us is set aside and the
\ncase is sent back to the High Court for hearing their appeal
\nwith the record after giving notice to the State, along with
\nthe  appeal  of\t Kondu,\t accused.   We\twould  perhaps\thave
\npersuaded  ourselves  to go into the merits of the  case  as
\nthis  Court has sometimes done, but since Kondu’s appeal  is
\npending\t in  the  High\tCourt it seems\tto  us\tto  be\tmore
\nappropriate and just that the entire appeal is heard by that
\nCourt  on the merits.  As the sentences imposed\t -are  short
\nthe  High Court, we have no doubt, would try to\t dispose  of
\nthe appeal as speedily as possible.  It may be observed that
\nthe  counsel for the appellants in this Court made  an\toral
\nprayer for their release on bail.  But as the case is  being
\nremitted to the High Court for considering the appeal of all
\nthe  five accused persons on merits it would be open to\t the
\nappellants-if so advised-to apply to the High Court for bail
\nwhich prayer would be considered
\naccording to law.\n<\/p>\n
Y.P.\n<\/p>\n
Sup.Cl\/70–4
\nAppeal allowed..\n<\/p>\n
530<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Govinda Kadtuji Kadam & Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 February, 1970 Equivalent citations: 1970 AIR 1033, 1970 SCR (3) 525 Author: I Dua Bench: Dua, I.D. PETITIONER: GOVINDA KADTUJI KADAM & ORS. Vs. RESPONDENT: THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09\/02\/1970 BENCH: DUA, I.D. BENCH: DUA, I.D. […]<\/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-189345","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nGovinda Kadtuji Kadam & Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 February, 1970 - 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\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Govinda Kadtuji Kadam & Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 February, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970\" \/>\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=\"1970-02-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-03T22:33:49+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\\\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Govinda Kadtuji Kadam & Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 February, 1970\",\"datePublished\":\"1970-02-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-03T22:33:49+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970\"},\"wordCount\":1671,\"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\\\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970\",\"name\":\"Govinda Kadtuji Kadam & Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 February, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1970-02-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-03T22:33:49+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Govinda Kadtuji Kadam & Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 February, 1970\"}]},{\"@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":"Govinda Kadtuji Kadam & Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 February, 1970 - 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\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Govinda Kadtuji Kadam & Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 February, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1970-02-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-03T22:33:49+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\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Govinda Kadtuji Kadam & Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 February, 1970","datePublished":"1970-02-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-03T22:33:49+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970"},"wordCount":1671,"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\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970","name":"Govinda Kadtuji Kadam & Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 February, 1970 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1970-02-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-03T22:33:49+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/govinda-kadtuji-kadam-ors-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-9-february-1970#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Govinda Kadtuji Kadam & Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra on 9 February, 1970"}]},{"@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\/189345","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=189345"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/189345\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=189345"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=189345"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=189345"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}