{"id":202521,"date":"2007-11-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-11-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007"},"modified":"2018-07-09T22:07:54","modified_gmt":"2018-07-09T16:37:54","slug":"vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007","title":{"rendered":"Vaaneswari vs The Secretary To Government on 14 November, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Vaaneswari vs The Secretary To Government on 14 November, 2007<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\n\nDATED : 14\/11\/2007\n\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA\nand\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.PALANIVELU\n\n\nH.C.P.(MD) No.501 of 2007\n\n\nVaaneswari\t\t\t... \tPetitioner\n\n\nvs.\n\n\n1.The Secretary to Government,\n  Prohibition and\n  Excise (XIV) Department,\n  Secretariat, Chennai - 9.\n\n2.The Commissioner of Police,\n  Madurai City,\n  Madurai.\n\n3.The Superintendent,\n  Central Prison,\n  Madurai. \t\t\t...  \tRespondents\n\n\n\tHabeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of\nIndia to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus calling for records relating to the order\nof detention passed by the 2nd respondent in No.11\/BDF GISSY\/2007 dated\n10.4.2007 and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to\nproduce the body and person of the petitioner husband Sothupanai @ Sivakumar,\nson of Murugan, aged 24\/07, Panja Compound, Kanmaikarai, Pandiyan Nagar, Madurai\nnow detained at Madurai Central Prison, before this Court and set him at\nliberty.\n\n\n!For petitioner\t\t...\tMr.D.Gurusamy\n\n\n^For respondents       \t...\tMr.Samuelraj\n                            \tAddl. Public Prosecutor\n\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>(Order of the Court was made by S.PALANIVELU, J)<\/p>\n<p>\tThe petitioner is the wife of the detenu.  The second respondent passed<br \/>\nthe detention order in No.11\/BDF GISSY\/2007 dated 10.4.2007.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. There were 4 adverse cases against the detenu, who has been branded as<br \/>\nGoonda.  The first case is in Crime No.277\/2000 registered under Section 382 IPC<br \/>\non the file of the F2 S.S.Colony Police Station, Madurai in which the occurrence<br \/>\nis said to have taken place on 14.3.2000 at 22.00hrs.  The second case is in<br \/>\nCrime No.437\/2000 registered under Section 379 IPC on the file of the aforesaid<br \/>\npolice station alleging that the occurrence took place on 17.4.2000 at about<br \/>\n22.00 hours.  Yet another case in Crime No.223\/2004 has also been registered<br \/>\nagainst the detenu under Sections 387 and 506 (ii) IPC on the file of B-11<br \/>\nKarimedu Police Station, Madurai.  One more case is in Crime No.913 of 2006<br \/>\nunder Sections 341, 323 and 506 (ii) IPC on the file of the B9 SS Colony Police<br \/>\nStation, Madurai.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. The ground case upon which the detention order came to be passed is one<br \/>\nthat on 14.3.2007 at about  07.00 hours one Sundar was coming to Arasaradi<br \/>\nOthakadai Market to purchase vegetables.  At that time, the detenu threatened<br \/>\nand demanded a sum of Rs.100\/- from him and since he refused, by threatening him<br \/>\nat knife point, the detenu robbed Rs.100\/- from the shirt of that C. Sundar and<br \/>\nwhile Sundar raised alarm, the detenu threatened the general public and escaped<br \/>\nfrom the scene of crime.  A case was registered in Crime No.448\/2007 under<br \/>\nsections 392 r\/w 397, 506(ii) IPC on the file of the C3 S.S.Colony Police<br \/>\nStation, Madurai.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. Learned counsel for the petitioner very much assails the order of<br \/>\ndetention on the ground that mere reading of the operative portion of the said<br \/>\norder would go to show that there was no application of mind on the part of the<br \/>\ndetaining authority.  In paragraph 5 of the detention order, the detaining<br \/>\nauthority viz., the second respondent has mentioned as follows:<br \/>\n\t&#8220;5. I am aware that Tr.Sothupanai @ Sivakumar, S\/o.Murugan is in remand in<br \/>\nground case C.3.S.S.Colony PS Cr.No.448\/2007, lodged at the Central Prison,<br \/>\nMadurai and that bail application moved on his behalf in the above case before<br \/>\nPrincipal Sessions Judge, Madurai vide Crl.M.P.No.1233\/2007 was dismissed on<br \/>\n28.3.2007.  I am also aware that there is real possibility of his coming out on<br \/>\nbail by filing further bail application for the above case since in similar<br \/>\ncases bails are granted by the concerned Court or Higher Court after lapse of<br \/>\ntime.  If he comes out on bail he will indulge in future activities which will<br \/>\nbe prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and therefore, there is a<br \/>\ncompelling necessity to pass this order of detention with a view to preventing<br \/>\nhim from indulging in such activities which are prejudicial to the maintenance<br \/>\nof public order.  On the materials placed before me, I am satisfied that the<br \/>\nsaid Tr.Sothupanai @ Sivakumar, S\/o. Murugan is a &#8216;Goonda&#8217; and there is a<br \/>\ncompelling necessity to detain him in order to prevent him from indulging in<br \/>\nacts which are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order under the<br \/>\nprovisions of the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. In fact, the detenu already filed a petition for bail before the<br \/>\nPrincipal Sessions Judge in Madurai vide Crl.M.P.No.1233 of 2007, which suffered<br \/>\ndismissal on 28.3.2007.  After 12 days from the date of dismissal, the detention<br \/>\norder came to be passed.  Mentioning the above said fact of the dismissal of the<br \/>\nbail application, the detaining authority has stated that there is every<br \/>\npossibility for the detenu to file further bail application and he may come out<br \/>\non bail, adding that in similar cases, Concerned Court or the High Court after<br \/>\nlapse of time have granted bail orders.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. Even though, he has mentioned his apprehension to the effect that if<br \/>\nthe detenu comes out on bail, he would indulge in the activities which is<br \/>\nprejudicial to the maintenance of pubalic order in the society, still it has to<br \/>\nbe seen in this matter whether the detaining authority has applied his mind<br \/>\nbefore passing the above said order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. In this context, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the<br \/>\ndecision reported in (2006) 2 Supreme Court Cases 664 (T.V.Sravanan alias<br \/>\nS.A.R.Prasana Venkatachaariar Chaturvedi  Vs. State through Secretary and<br \/>\nanother) wherein Their Lordships have held as follows:<br \/>\n\t&#8220;14. We are satisfied that for the same reason the order of detention<br \/>\ncannot be upheld in this case.  The bail applications moved by the appellant had<br \/>\nbeen rejected by the Courts and there was no material whatsoever to apprehend<br \/>\nthat he was likely to move a bail application or that there was imminent<br \/>\npossibility of the prayer for bail being granted.  The &#8220;imminent possibility&#8221; of<br \/>\nthe appellant coming out on bail is merely the ipse dixit of the detaining<br \/>\nauthority unsupported by any material whatsoever.  There was no cogent material<br \/>\nbefore the detaining authority on the basis of which the detaining authority<br \/>\ncould be satisfied that the detenu was likely to be released on bail.  The<br \/>\ninference has to be drawn from the available material on record.  In the absence<br \/>\nof such material on record the mere ipse dixit of the detaining authority is not<br \/>\nsufficient to sustain the order of detention.  There was, therefore, no<br \/>\nsufficient compliance with the requirements as laid down by this Court.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. The Apex Court in the above said case when came up for decision,<br \/>\nanalysed the previous circumstances when the detenu filed many applications for<br \/>\nbail  which faced dismissal even then the detaining authority had observed that<br \/>\nthere was possibility for the detenu to file fresh applications for bail and he<br \/>\nmight get bail from the  concerned court and that there was imminent possibility<br \/>\nfor him to come out on bail.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9. Taking into consideration the above said version of the detaining<br \/>\nauthority, the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court has found that the terms employed by the<br \/>\ndetaining authority are only ipse dixit of the said authority and it will not be<br \/>\nsufficient to satisfy the requirements of settled principles of law.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10. The settled legal position and the guidelines formulated by the<br \/>\nHon&#8217;ble Supreme Court have to be followed on the identical circumstances<br \/>\nprevailing in this matter also.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11. In the light of the dictum laid down by the  Supreme Court when the<br \/>\ndetention order in this case is considered, it is very clear that the detaining<br \/>\nauthority has not applied his mind before passing the detention order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12. In view of the above said position of law, the detention order passed<br \/>\nby the second respondent suffers from infirmity.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t13. Learned counsel for the petitioner  also placed reliance upon the<br \/>\nDivision Bench decision of this Court passed in Habeas Corpus Petition (MD)<br \/>\nNo.248 of 2007 on 10.8.2007 wherein similar circumstances were prevailing and<br \/>\nthis Court found that there was no material to show that the detenu would file<br \/>\nbail application and the apprehension on the part of the detaining authority is<br \/>\nmere ipsi dixit, which was not based upon any cogent materials.  In the above<br \/>\nsaid circumstances, we do not satisfy with the materials made available in the<br \/>\nground case and the detention order deserves to be quashed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t14. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed.  The impugned<br \/>\ndetention order dated 10.4.2007 is quashed and the detenu is directed to be<br \/>\nreleased forthwith if he is not required in connection with any other case.\n<\/p>\n<p>asvm<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.The Secretary to Government,<br \/>\n  Prohibition and<br \/>\n  Excise (XIV) Department,<br \/>\n  Secretariat, Chennai &#8211; 9.<\/p>\n<pre>\n\n2.The Commissioner of Police,\n  Madurai City,                         (asvm)\n  Madurai.\n\n3.The Superintendent,\n  Central Prison,\n  Madurai.\n\n4.The Additional Public Prosecutor,\n  Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,\n  Madurai.<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Vaaneswari vs The Secretary To Government on 14 November, 2007 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14\/11\/2007 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE F.M. IBRAHIM KALIFULLA and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.PALANIVELU H.C.P.(MD) No.501 of 2007 Vaaneswari &#8230; Petitioner vs. 1.The Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise (XIV) Department, Secretariat, Chennai [&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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-202521","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Vaaneswari vs The Secretary To Government on 14 November, 2007 - 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\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vaaneswari vs The Secretary To Government on 14 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-11-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-09T16:37:54+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\\\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Vaaneswari vs The Secretary To Government on 14 November, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-11-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-09T16:37:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1272,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007\",\"name\":\"Vaaneswari vs The Secretary To Government on 14 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-11-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-09T16:37:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vaaneswari vs The Secretary To Government on 14 November, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"Vaaneswari vs The Secretary To Government on 14 November, 2007 - 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\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vaaneswari vs The Secretary To Government on 14 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-11-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-09T16:37:54+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\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Vaaneswari vs The Secretary To Government on 14 November, 2007","datePublished":"2007-11-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-09T16:37:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007"},"wordCount":1272,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007","name":"Vaaneswari vs The Secretary To Government on 14 November, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-11-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-09T16:37:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vaaneswari-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-14-november-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vaaneswari vs The Secretary To Government on 14 November, 2007"}]},{"@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\/202521","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=202521"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/202521\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=202521"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=202521"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=202521"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}