{"id":203521,"date":"2008-10-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008"},"modified":"2017-02-05T21:43:14","modified_gmt":"2017-02-05T16:13:14","slug":"gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"Gopalbhai vs State on 15 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Gopalbhai vs State on 15 October, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Mohit S. H.N.Devani,&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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/1226120\/2008\t 1\/ 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\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 12261 of 2008\n \n\n \n \n==========================================\n \n\nGOPALBHAI\nMUKUNDBHAI PATEL - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT &amp; 6 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n========================================== \nAppearance\n: \nMR DILIP B\nRANA for Petitioner(s) : 1, \nMR APOORVA DAVE,\nAGP for Respondent(s) : 1, \nNOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) :\n1 - 7. \nMR VC VAGHELA for Respondent(s) :\n2, \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 MOHIT S. SHAH\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n                       and\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMS. JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 15\/10\/2008 \n\n \n\n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>(Per : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT S. SHAH)<\/p>\n<p>\t\tIn<br \/>\nthis petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner,<br \/>\na Director of Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Bodeli in Baroda<br \/>\nDistrict, has challenged the order dated 26th September,<br \/>\n2008 of the State Government dismissing Revision Application No.144<br \/>\nof 2008 as not maintainable and has also challenged the Resolution<br \/>\ndated 07th July, 2008 of the Licence Sub-Committee of the<br \/>\nA.P.M.C. and the subsequent Resolution No.7 passed by the General<br \/>\nBody of the A.P.M.C. on 16th July, 2008 by which about 729<br \/>\ntrader&#8217;s licences were granted.  The challenge is made on the ground<br \/>\nthat such a large number of licences were granted only to inflate the<br \/>\nvoters&#8217; list in the traders&#8217; constituency and, therefore, the<br \/>\ndecision was malafide and illegal.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\t\tMr.\n<\/p>\n<p>D.B. Rana, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a<br \/>\nlarge number of applications were made to the A.P.M.C., Bodeli<br \/>\nbetween 01st and 5th July, 2008; the Licence<br \/>\nSub-Committee recommended to grant 729 licences and the General Body<br \/>\nof the A.P.M.C. passed a resolution for granting 729 licences on 16th<br \/>\nJuly, 2008.   On the very next day i.e. on 17th July,<br \/>\n2008. the order was issued by the Director of Agricultural Market and<br \/>\nRural Finance for holding elections to A.P.M.C., Bodeli, and the<br \/>\nelection programme was issued on 28th July, 2008.  Hence,<br \/>\nsuch a large number of licences, on the eve of the order for holding<br \/>\nelections, was nothing but an attempt to subvert the election process<br \/>\nby inflating the list of voters which included a large number of<br \/>\npersons who are not really carrying on trading activities within the<br \/>\nA.P.M.C. area.  Reliance is placed on the decision of this court<br \/>\nreported in 2007 (3) G.L.R. 1942 and unreported decision dated 15th<br \/>\nJune, 2007 in Special Civil Application No.9601 of 2006.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\t\tIt<br \/>\nis also submitted by Mr. Rana that the revisional authority erred in<br \/>\nholding that the petitioner had no locus standi or right to<br \/>\nchallenge the resolution of the A.P.M.C.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\t\tIn<br \/>\nresponse to the notice, affidavit-in-reply has been filed on behalf<br \/>\nof respondent no.2   Market Committee.  The allegations made by the<br \/>\npetitioner are denied and it is pointed out that in the year<br \/>\n2007-2008, as many as 598 trader&#8217;s licences were granted.  For the<br \/>\nyear 2008-09, the first meeting of the Licence Sub-COmmittee was held<br \/>\non 07th July, 2008 and, therefore, most of the trader&#8217;s<br \/>\nlicences issued were by way of renewal and only about 130 more<br \/>\nlicences were issued as compared to the last year.  To show bona<br \/>\nfides of the Committee, it is also stated that even though 465<br \/>\napplications were received for such licences, at the meeting of the<br \/>\nA.P.M.C. held on 01st August, 2008, it was decided to<br \/>\nrefuse grant of such licences as the election process had commenced.<br \/>\nIt is also submitted by Mr. Vaghela for the Market Committee that the<br \/>\nelection process had already commenced and, therefore, as per the<br \/>\nsettled legal position,  this court cannot interfere with the<br \/>\nelection process at this stage.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\t\tMr.\n<\/p>\n<p>Apoorva Dave, learned AGP for respondents no.1 and 3 submits that the<br \/>\nrevisional authority also could not have interfered with the election<br \/>\nprocess and, therefore, the revision was required to be dismissed.<br \/>\nIt is also submitted that on merits also, the revisional authority<br \/>\nhas considered the submissions and found that the 729 licences were<br \/>\ngranted in accordance with the rules and the prescribed procedure.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\t\tWe<br \/>\nhave heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone<br \/>\nthrough the impugned order dated 26th September, 2008 of<br \/>\nthe revisional authority.  While the impugned order does state that<br \/>\nthe licences were granted in accordance with the rules and after<br \/>\nfollowing the procedure, the revisional authority has also expressed<br \/>\nthe view that the revisional petitioner, who is also the petitioner<br \/>\nherein, is a Director of the Market Committee and had participated<br \/>\nin the meeting and, therefore, the petitioner has no locus standi<br \/>\nto challenge such resolution.  It is not possible to accept the said<br \/>\nview of the revisional authority regarding the petitioner&#8217;s locus<br \/>\nstandi.  In this connection, reference made by learned counsel<br \/>\nfor the Market Committee to the observations of the Apex Court in<br \/>\nZoroastrian Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. and another vs.<br \/>\nDistrict Registrar, Co-operative Societies (Urban) and others<br \/>\n[AIR 2005 SC 2306] is misconceived.  Mr. Vaghela has<br \/>\nrelied upon the following observations made in paragraph 12 of the<br \/>\nsaid decision:-\n<\/p>\n<p> xxx<br \/>\n xxx  In fact, the individual right of the member, respondent No.2,<br \/>\nhas got submerged in the collective right of the Society.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\t\tThe<br \/>\nobservations made in a different context cannot be read in isolation.<br \/>\n The dispute in that case was about the right of a person to become a<br \/>\nmember of a Co-operative Society.  On the other hand, the grievance<br \/>\nof the petitioner herein was against the resolution of the Market<br \/>\nCommittee for issuing a large number of licences.  In this<br \/>\nconnection, it is necessary to refer to the provisions of Section 27<br \/>\nof the A.P.M.C. Act.  Sub-section (1) thereof confers powers on the<br \/>\nMarket Committee to grant or renew a general licence to a trader etc.<br \/>\nto operate in the market area or part thereof and also confers on the<br \/>\nCommittee the power to refuse to grant or renew any such licence<br \/>\nafter recording its reasons.  Sub-section (3) confers powers on the<br \/>\nMarket Committee, for reasons to be recorded in writing, to suspend<br \/>\nor cancel a licence inter alia on the ground that the licence<br \/>\nwas obtained through wilful misrepresentation or fraud.  If such a<br \/>\nground for cancellation or suspension of a licence is brought to the<br \/>\nnotice of the Committee but the Committee does not take the necessary<br \/>\naction, the Director, AMRF can exercise the powers under sub-section<br \/>\n(4) and after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the<br \/>\nholder of the licence and after recording reasons, the Director may<br \/>\nsuspend or cancel any licence which was granted by the Market<br \/>\nCommittee.  Sub-section (5) provides that any person aggrieved by an<br \/>\norder refusing to grant or renew a licence or aggrieved by an order<br \/>\nof suspension or cancellation of licence, must appeal to the<br \/>\nDirector, if such order was made by the Market Committee.  The appeal<br \/>\nwould lie to the State Government, if the order was made by the<br \/>\nDirector.  Section 48 confers powers on the State Government to call<br \/>\nfor and examine the proceedings of the Director or of any Market<br \/>\nCommittee for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the legality and<br \/>\npropriety of any decision or order passed by the Director or the<br \/>\nMarket Committee.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\t\tIn<br \/>\nthe context of the aforesaid statutory scheme, when the petitioner,<br \/>\nin his capacity as a Director of the A.P.M.C., had raised objections<br \/>\nbefore the Election Officer, which were also brought to the notice of<br \/>\nthe A.P.M.C., it was open to the A.P.M.C. to consider exercising<br \/>\npowers under sub-section (3) of Section 27.  Since the Market<br \/>\nCommittee did not consider exercising such powers under<br \/>\nsub-section(3), the Director could have been approached to exercise<br \/>\nthe powers under sub-section (4) for cancellation of the licence.<br \/>\nHowever, it can not be said that a Director of the Market Committee<br \/>\ncannot challenge a decision of the Market Committee not taking action<br \/>\nunder Section 27(3).  Hence, the order dated 26th<br \/>\nSeptember, 2008 of the revisional authority is set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\t\tIn<br \/>\nthe facts and circumstances of the case, since the election process<br \/>\nhas already commenced and the date of polling is stated to be 24th<br \/>\nOctober, 2008, all that can be done at this stage in the facts of the<br \/>\npresent case is to relegate the petitioner to the alternative remedy<br \/>\nof moving the Director under sub-section (4) of Section 27 of the Act<br \/>\nand the Director or the Deputy Director, exercising the powers under<br \/>\nsub-section (4) of Section 27, shall hear and decide the matter<br \/>\nexpeditiously and on merits without being influenced by any<br \/>\nobservations made by the revisional authority in the impugned order<br \/>\ndated 26th September, 2008, which is set aside as<br \/>\naforesaid.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tHowever,<br \/>\nlooking to the paucity of time, it would be appropriate to direct<br \/>\nthat if the petitioner moves the Director\/Deputy Director under<br \/>\nSection 27(4) of the Act, the said authority shall examine the<br \/>\ngrievance only regarding issuance of fresh licences for the year<br \/>\n2008-09 which were granted on 07th\/16th July,<br \/>\n2008.  The renewal of licences will not be the subject matter of such<br \/>\ninquiry.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\t\tLooking<br \/>\nto the fact that the polling is scheduled to take place on 24th<br \/>\nOctober, 2008, if the petitioner makes such an application before the<br \/>\nDirector\/Deputy Director of A.P.M.C. by 17th October,<br \/>\n2008, the authority shall examine and decide the matter by 23rd<br \/>\nOctober, 2008 for which purpose, the A.P.M.C. will make available all<br \/>\nthe relevant record regarding issuance of  fresh licences (not<br \/>\nrenewal of licences) for the year 2008-09 before the Director\/Deputy<br \/>\nDirector of AMRF on 18th October, 2008.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\t\tIt<br \/>\nis clarified that the Director\/Deputy Director exercising powers<br \/>\nunder sub-section (4) of Section 27 will be free to decide the<br \/>\nquestion of legality or otherwise of grant of fresh licences on<br \/>\n07th\/16th July, 2008 without being inhibited by<br \/>\nthe fact that the election process has already commenced.  If it is<br \/>\nfound that the grant of fresh licences on 07th\/16th<br \/>\nJuly, 2008 was not in accordance with law, such licence holders shall<br \/>\nnot be permitted to vote\/participate in the election scheduled to be<br \/>\nheld on 24th October, 2008.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\t\tSubject<br \/>\nto the aforesaid observations, this petition is disposed of<br \/>\naccordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.\t\tA<br \/>\ncopy of the order shall be made available to the learned AGP and also<br \/>\nto Mr. Vaghela for the A.P.M.C., Bodeli for timely compliance with<br \/>\nthe directions.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tDirect<br \/>\nService is permitted.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t(<br \/>\nMohit S. Shah, J. )<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t(<br \/>\nHarsha Devani, J. )<\/p>\n<p>hki<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Gopalbhai vs State on 15 October, 2008 Author: Mohit S. H.N.Devani,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/1226120\/2008 1\/ 7 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12261 of 2008 ========================================== GOPALBHAI MUKUNDBHAI PATEL &#8211; Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT &amp; 6 &#8211; Respondent(s) ========================================== [&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-203521","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 v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Gopalbhai vs State on 15 October, 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\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Gopalbhai vs State on 15 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-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=\"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-02-05T16:13:14+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Gopalbhai vs State on 15 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-05T16:13:14+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1638,\"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\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008\",\"name\":\"Gopalbhai vs State on 15 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-05T16:13:14+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Gopalbhai vs State on 15 October, 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:\/\/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":"Gopalbhai vs State on 15 October, 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\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Gopalbhai vs State on 15 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-02-05T16:13:14+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Gopalbhai vs State on 15 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-05T16:13:14+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008"},"wordCount":1638,"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\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008","name":"Gopalbhai vs State on 15 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-05T16:13:14+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gopalbhai-vs-state-on-15-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Gopalbhai vs State on 15 October, 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:\/\/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\/203521","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=203521"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/203521\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=203521"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=203521"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=203521"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}