{"id":19709,"date":"2010-08-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010"},"modified":"2017-09-25T09:25:07","modified_gmt":"2017-09-25T03:55:07","slug":"bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"Bhagirath vs The on 30 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Bhagirath vs The on 30 August, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&amp;Nbsp;<\/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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/188\/2009\t 5\/ 7\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 188 of 2009\n \n\n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nBHAGIRATH\n@ BHATO PRAVINSIN BALVANTSINH VAGHELA - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nRJ GOSWAMI for\nAppellant(s) : 1,MRDINESHBPATEL for Appellant(s) : 1, \nMR HH PARIKH\nLd. APP for Opponent(s) :\n1, \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 Z.K.SAIYED\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 30\/08\/2010 \n\n \n\n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>1.\tThe<br \/>\npresent appellant has preferred this appeal under sec. 374(2) of the<br \/>\nCode of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment and order of<br \/>\nconviction and sentence  dated  11.12.2008 passed by the learned<br \/>\nAddl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 6, Ahmedabad (Rural) at<br \/>\nMirzapur, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 97\/2007, whereby, the<br \/>\nlearned Judge has convicted the appellant under sec. 363 and<br \/>\nsentenced to undergo imprisonment of three years R\/I and to pay a<br \/>\nfine of Rs. 300\/, in default, to undergo further  S\/I for two months.<br \/>\nThe appellant is also convicted under sec.366 of  IPC and sentenced<br \/>\nto undergo R\/I for a period of four years and to pay a fine of Rs<br \/>\n400\/- in default, to undergo further S\/I for four months. The<br \/>\nappellant is also convicted under sec. 376 of IPC and sentenced to<br \/>\nundergo R\/I for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000\/-, in defualt,<br \/>\nto undergo S\/I for five months,  which is impugned in this appeal.<br \/>\nThe learned Judge has also directed that all the sentences to run<br \/>\nconcurrently.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe<br \/>\nbrief facts of the prosecution case is as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tThe<br \/>\ncase of the prosecution, in nut-shell is that on 18.3.2007 between<br \/>\n2.30am to 5.30am  in the night, the appellant has taken away minor<br \/>\ndaughter Srusti from the lawful custody of the complainant from his<br \/>\nresidence as also Indica Car bearing registration No. GJ-9-H-1922<br \/>\nwith an intention to commit rape with her at Morbi and Dharampur, and<br \/>\n the appellant has committed rape on minor daughter Shrushti at Morbi<br \/>\nand dharampur.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tTherefore<br \/>\na complaint came to be filed by the complainant before the Ghatlodia<br \/>\nPolice Station. The panchnama of the clothes put on by the victim on<br \/>\n18.3.2007 was prepared in the presence of panch witness and<br \/>\nstatements of the  witnesses were recorded and on completion of the<br \/>\ninvestigation, charge-sheet was filed in the Court of learned<br \/>\nJudicial  Magistrate First Class, Ahmedabad. Thereafter, as the case<br \/>\nwas exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned<br \/>\nMagistrate has committed the case to the Court of Sessions, which was<br \/>\ngiven number as Sessions Case No. 97\/2007.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tThereafter,<br \/>\nthe charge was framed at Ex. 3 against the appellant. The appellant<br \/>\naccused has pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tIn<br \/>\norder to bring the home the charge levelled against the appellant-<br \/>\naccused, the prosecution has examined the following witnesses<\/p>\n<p>PW-1<br \/>\n\tDr. Upendra Gopalbhai Patel, Ex. 8<\/p>\n<p>PW-2<br \/>\n\tFatesinh Umedsinh Parmar Ex. 17<\/p>\n<p>PW-3<br \/>\n\tChetan Kaliyabhai Ahir Ex. 19<\/p>\n<p>PW-4<br \/>\n\tArvindsinh Dipsinh Rathod Ex. 21<\/p>\n<p>PW-5<br \/>\n\tShrikrishna Raghuvirdas Menon Ex. 25<\/p>\n<p>PW-6<br \/>\n\tHiteshbhai Rameshbhai Ex. 27<\/p>\n<p>PW-7<br \/>\n\tDr. Babubhai Somabhai Parmar Ex. 30<\/p>\n<p>PW-8<br \/>\n\tSrusti A Rathod Ex. 35<\/p>\n<p>PW-9<br \/>\n\tSahebkhan Jivankhan PathanEx. 36<\/p>\n<p>PW-10Devisinh<br \/>\n\tRamjibhai Makwana PSI Ex. 40<\/p>\n<p>PW-11<br \/>\n\tJayendrasinh Kanaksinh Zala, PI, Ex. 41<\/p>\n<p>\tDuring<br \/>\nthe course of the trial, the prosecution has also produced<br \/>\ndocumentary evidence before the trial Court, which are as under.\n<\/p>\n<p>Complaint<br \/>\n\tEx. 22<\/p>\n<p>Birth<br \/>\n\tcertificate of victim Ex. 23<\/p>\n<p>RC<br \/>\n\tBook of Indica car Ex. 24<\/p>\n<p>Panchnama<br \/>\n\tof scene of offence Ex. 26<\/p>\n<p>Panchnama<br \/>\n\tof person of accused Ex. 19<\/p>\n<p>Medical<br \/>\n\tcertificate of victim Ex. 10<\/p>\n<p>Medical<br \/>\n\tcertificate of accused Ex. 9<\/p>\n<p>Medical<br \/>\n\treport about age of victim Ex. 31<\/p>\n<p>Copy<br \/>\n\tof register of the Guest House Ex. 29<\/p>\n<p>Medical<br \/>\n\tcase papers of accused Ex. 11<\/p>\n<p>Yadi<br \/>\n\tEx. 12<\/p>\n<p>Letter<br \/>\n\tEx. 13<\/p>\n<p>Case<br \/>\n\tpaper of victim Ex. 14<\/p>\n<p>Yadi<br \/>\n\tfor medical Ex. 15<\/p>\n<p>Letter<br \/>\n\tex. 16<\/p>\n<p>Case<br \/>\n\tpapers Ex. 31<\/p>\n<p>History<br \/>\n\tpapers Ex. 32<\/p>\n<p>Yadi<br \/>\n\tEx. 37<\/p>\n<p>Arrest<br \/>\n\tmemo Ex. 38<\/p>\n<p>Yadi<br \/>\n\tto add sec. 376 of IPC Ex. 42<\/p>\n<p>Copy<br \/>\n\tof register of Guest House Ex. 28<\/p>\n<p>Copy<br \/>\n\tof licence Ex. 29<\/p>\n<p>Yadi<br \/>\n\tto FSL ex. 43<\/p>\n<p>Receipt<br \/>\n\tof FSL Ex. 44<\/p>\n<p>Letter<br \/>\n\tof FSL Ex. 45<\/p>\n<p>Report<br \/>\n\tof FSL Ex. 46<\/p>\n<p>Report<br \/>\n\tof Serological Ex. 47<\/p>\n<p>7.\tThereafter,<br \/>\nafter examining the witnesses, further statement of the<br \/>\nappellant-accused under sec. 313 of CrPC was recorded in which the<br \/>\nappellant-accused has denied the case of the prosecution.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tAfter<br \/>\nconsidering the oral as well as documentary evidence and after<br \/>\nhearing the parties, learned Judge vide impugned judgment and order<br \/>\ndated 11.12.2008 held the appellant   accused guilty to the charge<br \/>\nlevelled against him under sec. 363, 366 and 376 of IPC and convicted<br \/>\nand sentenced the appellant accused, as stated above.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tBeing<br \/>\naggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order of<br \/>\nconviction and sentence passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge,<br \/>\nAhmedabad, the present appellant has preferred this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tHeard<br \/>\nMr. RJ Goswami learned advocate for the appellant and Mr HH Parikh<br \/>\nlearned APP for the respondent-State.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tMr.\n<\/p>\n<p>Goswami learned advocate for the appellant has contended that it is<br \/>\nestablished beyond reasonable doubt that there was a love between the<br \/>\nappellant and prosecutrix. He has also shown the birth certificate of<br \/>\nthe prosecutrix. No doubt, the prosecutrix is blow 16 years, but<br \/>\nlooking to the provisions of sec. 363, the prosecution has<br \/>\nestablished its case beyond reasonable doubt and, therefore, the<br \/>\nlearned Judge has imposed the punishment upon the present appellant,<br \/>\nas stated above. Mr Goswami has also contended that from the medical<br \/>\npapers, it appears that there was a consent of the prosecutrix.<br \/>\nHowever, looking to the provisions of sec. 376 of IPC, the present<br \/>\nprosecutrix was below 16 years, therefore, Mr. Goswami has submitted<br \/>\nthat he is not  arguing the matter on merits, but he is arguing the<br \/>\nmatter only on the quantum of punishment. Mr. Goswami has, therefore,<br \/>\ncontended that looking to the age of the present appellant, the<br \/>\nconviction under sec. 376 of IPC  for seven years is very harsh and<br \/>\nrequires to be reduced.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\tAs<br \/>\nagainst this, learned APP Mr. HH Parikh appearing for the State has<br \/>\nread the oral as well as documentary evidence produced on record and<br \/>\ncontended that looking to the age of the prosecutrix, who was below<br \/>\n13 years at the time of incident, she does not know anything<br \/>\nregarding her future and for the purpose to protect the society, the<br \/>\nimpugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the<br \/>\nlearned Addl. Sessions Judge requires to be confirmed.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.\tI<br \/>\nhave gone through the oral as well as documentary evidence produced<br \/>\non the record. I have read the oral evidence of prosecution<br \/>\nwitness-complainant and other material witnesses and also perused the<br \/>\ncharge framed against the appellant. From the cross-examination of<br \/>\nthe prosecutrix, it is prima-facie  established that there was a love<br \/>\naffair between the prosecutrix and the present appellant. From the<br \/>\nconduct of the prosecutrix, it is clear that she has moved with the<br \/>\npresent appellant at different places and also visited the hotel, no<br \/>\ndoubt, physical relation has been established through medical papers.<br \/>\nThe learned Addl. Sessions Judge has convicted the appellant after<br \/>\nconsidering the oral evidence of victim as well as medical expert. I<br \/>\nhave gone through the reasons given by the learned Addl. Sessions<br \/>\nJudge. However, I am of the opinion that when the learned advocate<br \/>\nappearing for the appellant is not arguing the matter on merits but<br \/>\nagruing the matter only for the purpose of quantum of punishment,<br \/>\nthen, in my opinion, the conviction under sec. 376 of IPC imposed by<br \/>\nthe learned Addl. Sessions Judge upon the appellant to undergo 7<br \/>\nyears R\/I is required to be reduced to 5 years.\n<\/p>\n<p>14.\t\tIn<br \/>\nthe result, this appeal is partly allowed.  The impugned judgment and<br \/>\norder of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Addl. Sessions<br \/>\nJudge, Fast Track Court No. 6, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Mirzapur,<br \/>\nAhmedabad in Sessions Case No. 97\/2007 is hereby modified to the<br \/>\nextent that the conviction under sec. 376 of IPC imposed upon the<br \/>\nappellant to undergo R\/I for 7 years is hereby reduced to 5 years<br \/>\nR\/I. Rest of the impugned judgment and order shall remain unaltered.<br \/>\nR &amp; P to be sent back to the trial court forthwith.\n<\/p>\n<p>(Z.K.SAIYED,<br \/>\nJ.)<\/p>\n<p>mandora\/<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Bhagirath vs The on 30 August, 2010 Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/188\/2009 5\/ 7 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 188 of 2009 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to [&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-19709","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 v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Bhagirath vs The on 30 August, 2010 - 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\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bhagirath vs The on 30 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-08-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-25T03:55:07+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bhagirath vs The on 30 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-25T03:55:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1264,\"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\\\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010\",\"name\":\"Bhagirath vs The on 30 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-25T03:55:07+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bhagirath vs The on 30 August, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Bhagirath vs The on 30 August, 2010 - 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\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bhagirath vs The on 30 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-25T03:55:07+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bhagirath vs The on 30 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-25T03:55:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010"},"wordCount":1264,"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\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010","name":"Bhagirath vs The on 30 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-25T03:55:07+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhagirath-vs-the-on-30-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bhagirath vs The on 30 August, 2010"}]},{"@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\/19709","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=19709"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/19709\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=19709"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=19709"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=19709"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}