{"id":190184,"date":"2011-10-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-10-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011"},"modified":"2018-09-19T17:37:21","modified_gmt":"2018-09-19T12:07:21","slug":"state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011","title":{"rendered":"State vs Laxmiben on 18 October, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
State vs Laxmiben on 18 October, 2011<\/div>\n
Author: D.H.Waghela, Honourable J.C.Upadhyaya,<\/div>\n
  \n Gujarat High Court Case Information System \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\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.MA\/7941\/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. 7941 of 2011\n \n\nIn\n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nMISC.APPLICATION No. 7940 of 2011\n \n\nIn\nCRIMINAL APPEAL No. 676 of 2011\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nMISC.APPLICATION No. 7940 of 2011\n \n\nIn\nCRIMINAL APPEAL No. 676 of 2011\n \n\nWith\n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 676 of 2011\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n<\/pre>\n
STATE
\nOF GUJARAT – Applicant(s)<\/p>\n
Versus<\/p>\n
LAXMIBEN
\n@ KALIBEN WD\/O RAMESHBHAI MANGABHAI HALPATI – Respondent(s)<\/p>\n
=========================================================<\/p>\n
Appearance
\n:\n<\/p>\n
MR
\nKP RAVAL, APP for Applicant(s) : 1,
\nNone for Respondent(s) :\n<\/p>\n
1,
\n=========================================================<\/p>\n
CORAM
\n\t\t\t:\n<\/p>\n
HONOURABLE
\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA<\/p>\n
and<\/p>\n
HONOURABLE
\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA<\/p>\n
Date
\n: 18\/10\/2011 <\/p>\n
ORAL
\nCOMMON ORDER :\n<\/p>\n
(Per
\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA)<\/p>\n
1.\t\tThe
\napplicant – appellant – State has filed this application
\nu\/s. 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condondation of delay of 8
\ndays caused in preferring the application seeking leave to prefer
\nappeal challenging impugned judgment and order dated 28\/2\/2011
\nrendered by Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge, Navsari, in Sessions Case No.
\n28 of 2010, whereby the respondent herein, who was original accused
\nin the aforesaid sessions case, came to be
\nacquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 302 of the Indian
\nPenal Code [IPC].\n<\/p>\n
2.\t\tMr.\n<\/p>\n
 KP Raval,  Ld. APP, for the applicant – appellant –
\nState submitted that the delay of 8 days came to be caused on account
\nof administrative reasons in obtaining sanction order from the Legal
\nDepartment of the State to prefer the acquittal appeal. It is
\nsubmitted that the delay has been sufficiently explained in the
\napplication and the contents whereof are supported by the affidavit
\nof Under Secretary of the Legal Department of the State. Mr. Raval,
\nLd. APP further submitted that the prosecution in the instant case,
\nexamined 10 witnesses and produced relevant documentary evidence in
\nsupport of its case, but the trial Court did not properly appreciate
\nthe evidence on record and ultimately erred in recording the
\nacquittal of the accused. Mr. Raval submitted that there was injury
\non the body of the accused and when she was referred to a hospital,
\nbefore the Medical Officer, in her history, she admitted killing of
\nher husband by her. Mr. Raval though submitted that considering the
\nevidence of minor children of the deceased and of the accused as well
\nas considering the evidence of neighbours, it is true that they did
\nnot support the prosecution case regarding the murder of the deceased
\nby his wife, the respondent lady accused, but the circumstantial
\nevidence establishes her complicity in the crime. Mr. Raval,
\ntherefore, submitted that if the delay is not condoned and if the
\napplicant appellant is not permitted to prefer the acquittal appeal,
\nthe meritorious case of the prosecution shall be adversely affected
\nand the prosecution shall suffer great prejudice.\n<\/p>\n
3.\t\tMr.\n<\/p>\n
Raval, Ld. APP in support of his aforesaid submission, supplied to us
\nthe copies of the depositions of the witnesses and of the documents
\nrelied upon by the prosecution before the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n
4.\t\tSince
\nMr. Raval, Ld. APP, for the applicant – appellant – State
\nhas submitted that there are merits in the appeal and if the delay is
\nnot condoned and the applicant- appellant is not permitted to prefer
\nthe acquittal appeal, then the meritorious case of the prosecution
\nshall be adversely affected and that the prosecution shall suffer
\ngreat prejudice,   we deemed it proper to examine impugned judgment
\nand order rendered by the trial Court, so also the relevant papers of
\noral and documentary evidence adduced by the prosecution before the
\ntrial Court.\n<\/p>\n
5.\t\tThe
\nrespondent – original accused Laxmiben happened to be wife of
\nthe deceased. As per the prosecution case, on account of some dispute
\nabout the household expenses, the lady accused pushed her husband
\ndeceased Rameshbhai and the deceased fell on the ground and the
\naccused pressed neck of the deceased and as per the medical evidence
\non record, the deceased died on account of asphyxia due to
\nstrangulation.\n<\/p>\n
6.\t\tIn
\nsupport of the prosecution, the prosecution examined 10 witnesses and
\nrelied upon 15 documents detailed in paras. 4 and 5 in the impugned
\njudgment. It is pertinent to note that the prosecution examined two
\nminor children of the deceased and of the accused, namely PW 1 Ravi
\nand PW 2 Sonal and they neither supported the prosecution case nor
\nthe incident having been witnessed by them. They stated that they do
\nnot know as to how their father died. The prosecution examined
\nneighbours, namely PW 3 Rakesh, PW 4 Jignesh, PW 5 Suresh and PW 6
\nManubhai and all these neighbour witnesses did not support the
\nprosecution case and they pleaded their complete ignorance as to how
\nand under what circumstances deceased died. The prosecution heavily
\nrelied upon the evidence of PW 8 Dr. CM Patel examined at exh. 19 and
\naccording to his version, he examined the respondent – lady
\naccused as there were some superficial injuries on her body and
\naccording to him, the accused gave history to the effect that on
\n19\/4\/2010 at about 12.00 in the noon, a quarrel took place between
\nherself and her deceased husband and the deceased attempted to
\ninflict a blow with axe on her, but any how she could save herself
\nand in that process, the deceased fell on the ground and she had
\npressed mouth of the deceased with her blouse. According to Ld. APP
\nMr. Raval, this admission itself is sufficient to record conviction
\nof the accused. This aspect of the matter has been elaborately dealt
\nwith by the trial Court in the impugned judgment and we are of the
\nconsidered opinion that when the witnesses examined by the
\nprosecution in capacity as eye witnesses did not support the
\nprosecution case, the instant solitary piece of evidence, which is
\notherwise considered to be a very weak piece of evidence, namely
\nalleged extra judicial confession, cannot be considered as
\nsubstantive piece of evidence so that a conviction can be based upon
\nit. The trial Court, therefore, in the above view of the matter
\narrived at the correct conclusion that such piece of evidence alone
\ncannot be said to be substantive piece of evidence or a sufficient
\nevidence to record conviction of the accused in the wake of the fact
\nthat none of the so called eye witnesses supported the prosecution
\ncase. The trial Court, in the above view of the matter, came to the
\nconclusion that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond any
\nreasonable doubt and ultimately granted benefit of doubt to the
\nrespondent accused.\n<\/p>\n
7.\t\tIt
\nis further well settled that if  two views are possible, one leading
\nto the guilt of the accused and another leading to the innocence of
\nthe accused, the view leading to the innocence of the accused is
\nrequired to be accepted.\n<\/p>\n
8.\t\tSeen
\nin the above context, we do not find it necessary to interfere with
\nthe impugned judgment and order of acquittal rendered by the trial
\nCourt. In the result the submission made on behalf by the Ld. APP for
\nthe applicant – appellant State that the prosecution has
\nmeritorious case and if the delay is not condoned and the appellant
\nis not permitted to prefer the  acquittal appeal,  the meritorious
\ncase of the prosecution shall be adversely affected and that the
\nprosecution shall suffer great prejudice, has no force. We are,
\ntherefore, of the opinion that even if the delay  is condoned and the
\napplicant-appellant is permitted to prefer the acquittal appeal,  no
\ngainful purpose would be served as the appeal itself lacks merit.\n<\/p>\n
9.\t\tFor
\nthe foregoing reasons, the application praying condonation of delay,
\napplication seeking leave to prefer appeal and the appeal stand
\ndismissed.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(D.H.WAGHELA,
\nJ.)<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(J.C.UPADHYAYA,
\nJ.)<\/p>\n
*
\nPansala.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court State vs Laxmiben on 18 October, 2011 Author: D.H.Waghela, Honourable J.C.Upadhyaya, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.MA\/7941\/2011 7\/ 7 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 7941 of 2011 In CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION No. 7940 of 2011 In CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 676 of 2011 With CRIMINAL […]<\/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-190184","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nState vs Laxmiben on 18 October, 2011 - 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\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State vs Laxmiben on 18 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-10-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-19T12:07:21+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State vs Laxmiben on 18 October, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-10-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-19T12:07:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1219,\"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\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011\",\"name\":\"State vs Laxmiben on 18 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-10-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-19T12:07:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State vs Laxmiben on 18 October, 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":"State vs Laxmiben on 18 October, 2011 - 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\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State vs Laxmiben on 18 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-10-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-19T12:07:21+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State vs Laxmiben on 18 October, 2011","datePublished":"2011-10-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-19T12:07:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011"},"wordCount":1219,"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\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011","name":"State vs Laxmiben on 18 October, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-10-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-19T12:07:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-laxmiben-on-18-october-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State vs Laxmiben on 18 October, 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\/190184","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=190184"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/190184\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=190184"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=190184"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=190184"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}