{"id":192273,"date":"2008-02-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-01-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008"},"modified":"2015-03-07T12:05:46","modified_gmt":"2015-03-07T06:35:46","slug":"state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008","title":{"rendered":"State Of Rajasthan vs Madan Singh on 1 February, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">State Of Rajasthan vs Madan Singh on 1 February, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: . A Pasayat<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, P. Sathasivam<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (crl.)  234 of 2008\n\nPETITIONER:\nState of Rajasthan\n\nRESPONDENT:\nMadan Singh\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 01\/02\/2008\n\nBENCH:\nDr. ARIJIT PASAYAT &amp; P. SATHASIVAM\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T<br \/>\n(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 3629 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 judgment of a learned<br \/>\nSingle Judge of the Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur.  A<br \/>\nlearned Single Judge by the impugned judgment while<br \/>\nupholding the conviction for offence punishable under Section<br \/>\n376 (2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC),<br \/>\nreduced the sentence from 10 years to 7 years.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tThe respondent allegedly committed rape on a minor girl<br \/>\naged about 10 years on 29.8.1999. There is no need to refer to<br \/>\nthe factual position in detail as the High Court has upheld the<br \/>\nconviction. It only needs to be noted that on the basis of the<br \/>\nevidence adduced, the trial Court found that the victim was<br \/>\naged about 10 years. The only point which was urged before<br \/>\nthe High Court in addition to the question of sentence was<br \/>\nthat the offence at best was one under Section 376 read with<br \/>\nSection 511 IPC. It was submitted that the accused had<br \/>\nsuffered custody of about 6 years and, therefore, he being only<br \/>\nbread earner of the family and being of young age, the<br \/>\nsentence should be reduced to the period already undergone.<br \/>\nThe plea was opposed by the State stating that in view of the<br \/>\nstatutory minimum sentence provided, no leniency was called<br \/>\nfor. The High Court found that the trial Court was justified in<br \/>\nholding the appellant guilty of offence punishable under<br \/>\nSection 376 (2)(f) of IPC. As the victim was aged about 10<br \/>\nyears, it held that considering the factual position after<br \/>\nassigning reason the minimum sentence can be reduced.<br \/>\nHaving so observed, the High Court reduced the sentence to<br \/>\nseven years and a fine of Rs.5,000\/- with default stipulation<br \/>\nwith the following conclusions was imposed:\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAfter having considered the entire matter<br \/>\nand also taking into consideration the<br \/>\nsubmission of learned counsel that the<br \/>\naccused is a young person who is the only<br \/>\nbread earner of his family and his kids who<br \/>\nhave now grown up need his supervision, I<br \/>\ndeem it proper to reduce his sentence under<br \/>\nSection 376(2)(f) to a term of 7 years with fine<br \/>\nof Rs.5,000\/- in default, to further suffer one<br \/>\nyears simple imprisonment and modify the<br \/>\norder of learned trial Court to that extent.<\/p>\n<p>4.\tLearned counsel for the appellant submitted that when<br \/>\nminimum sentence is prescribed, only for adequate and<br \/>\nspecial reasons the sentence less than minimum provided for<br \/>\ncan be imposed.  In the instant case the reasons indicated did<br \/>\nnot meet the requirement of law.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tThe respondent has not entered appearance in spite of<br \/>\nservice of notice.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tBoth in cases of sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 376<br \/>\nthe court has the discretion to impose a sentence of<br \/>\nimprisonment less than the prescribed minimum for adequate<br \/>\nand special reasons. If the court does not mention such<br \/>\nreasons in the judgment, there is no scope for awarding a<br \/>\nsentence lesser than the prescribed minimum.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tIt is to be noted that in sub-section(2) of Section 376<br \/>\nI.P.C. more stringent punishment can be awarded taking into<br \/>\naccount the special features indicated in the said sub-section.<br \/>\nThe present case is covered by Section 376(2)(f) IPC i.e. when<br \/>\nrape is committed on a woman when she is under 12 years of<br \/>\nage. Admittedly, in the case at hand the victim was 10 years of<br \/>\nage at the time of commission of offence.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tThe measure of punishment in a case of rape cannot<br \/>\ndepend upon the social status of the victim or the accused. It<br \/>\nmust depend upon the conduct of the accused, the state and<br \/>\nage of the sexually assaulted female and the gravity of the<br \/>\ncriminal act. Crimes of violence upon women need to be<br \/>\nseverely dealt with. The socio-economic status, religion, race,<br \/>\ncaste or creed of the accused or the victim are irrelevant<br \/>\nconsiderations in sentencing policy. Protection of society and<br \/>\ndeterring the criminal is the avowed object of law and that is<br \/>\nrequired to be achieved by imposing an appropriate sentence.<br \/>\nThe sentencing Courts are expected to consider all relevant<br \/>\nfacts and circumstances bearing on the question of sentence<br \/>\nand proceed to impose a sentence commensurate with the<br \/>\ngravity of the offence. Courts must hear the loud cry for justice<br \/>\nby the society in cases of the heinous crime of rape on<br \/>\ninnocent helpless girls of tender years, as in this case, and<br \/>\nrespond by imposition of proper sentence. Public abhorrence<br \/>\nof the crime needs reflection through imposition of appropriate<br \/>\nsentence by the Court. There are no extenuating or mitigating<br \/>\ncircumstances available on the record which may justify<br \/>\nimposition of any sentence less than the prescribed minimum<br \/>\non the respondent. To show mercy in the case of such a<br \/>\nheinous crime would be a travesty of justice and the plea for<br \/>\nleniency is wholly misplaced.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tThe legislative mandate to impose a sentence for the<br \/>\noffence of rape on a girl under 12 years of age, for a term<br \/>\nwhich shall not be less than 10 years, but which may extend<br \/>\nto life and also to fine reflects the intent of stringency in<br \/>\nsentence. The proviso to Section 376(2) IPC, of course, lays<br \/>\ndown that the court may, for adequate and special reasons to<br \/>\nbe mentioned in the judgment, impose sentence of<br \/>\nimprisonment of either description for a term of less than 10<br \/>\nyears. Thus, the normal sentence in a case where rape is<br \/>\ncommitted on a child below 12 years of age is not less than 10<br \/>\nyears&#8217; RI, though in exceptional cases &#8220;for special and<br \/>\nadequate reasons&#8221; sentence of less than 10 years&#8217; RI can also<br \/>\nbe awarded. It is a fundamental rule of construction that a<br \/>\nproviso must be considered with relation to the principal<br \/>\nmatter to which it stands as a proviso particularly in such like<br \/>\npenal provisions. The courts are obliged to respect the<br \/>\nlegislative mandate in the matter of awarding of sentence in all<br \/>\nsuch cases. Recourse to the proviso can be had only for<br \/>\n&#8220;special and adequate reasons&#8221; and not in a casual manner.<br \/>\nWhether there exist any &#8220;special and adequate reasons&#8221; would<br \/>\ndepend upon a variety of factors and the peculiar facts and<br \/>\ncircumstances of each case. No hard and fast rule of universal<br \/>\napplication can be laid down in that behalf.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tIn view of the position in law indicated above, the<br \/>\njudgment of the High Court reducing the sentence to 7 years is<br \/>\nclearly unsustainable and is set aside. The sentence of 10<br \/>\nyears as imposed by the trial Court is restored.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tThe appeal is allowed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India State Of Rajasthan vs Madan Singh on 1 February, 2008 Author: . A Pasayat Bench: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, P. Sathasivam CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 234 of 2008 PETITIONER: State of Rajasthan RESPONDENT: Madan Singh DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01\/02\/2008 BENCH: Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT &amp; P. SATHASIVAM JUDGMENT: J U D G M [&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-192273","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>State Of Rajasthan vs Madan Singh on 1 February, 2008 - 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\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of Rajasthan vs Madan Singh on 1 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-01-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-03-07T06:35:46+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-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of Rajasthan vs Madan Singh on 1 February, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-01-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-07T06:35:46+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1106,\"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\\\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008\",\"name\":\"State Of Rajasthan vs Madan Singh on 1 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-01-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-07T06:35:46+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of Rajasthan vs Madan Singh on 1 February, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"State Of Rajasthan vs Madan Singh on 1 February, 2008 - 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\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of Rajasthan vs Madan Singh on 1 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-01-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-03-07T06:35:46+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-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of Rajasthan vs Madan Singh on 1 February, 2008","datePublished":"2008-01-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-07T06:35:46+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008"},"wordCount":1106,"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\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008","name":"State Of Rajasthan vs Madan Singh on 1 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-01-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-07T06:35:46+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-rajasthan-vs-madan-singh-on-1-february-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of Rajasthan vs Madan Singh on 1 February, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/192273","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=192273"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/192273\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=192273"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=192273"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=192273"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}