{"id":206686,"date":"2010-11-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-11-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010"},"modified":"2016-11-28T07:55:02","modified_gmt":"2016-11-28T02:25:02","slug":"bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010","title":{"rendered":"Bhargavi vs The Union Of India on 15 November, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Bhargavi vs The Union Of India on 15 November, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 12538 of 2010(N)\n\n\n1. BHARGAVI, W\/O.VELU MADHAVAN, AGED 81\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTD BY THE\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.J.OM PRAKASH\n\n                For Respondent  :SHRI.GEORGE ZACHARIA, CGC\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR\n\n Dated :15\/11\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                     T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.\n                  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                    W.P.(C) No.12538 of 2010-N\n                  - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n             Dated this the 15th day of November, 2010.\n\n                                JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
       The petitioner who is the widow of late Shri Velu Madhavan, is<\/p>\n
aggrieved by Ext.P12 order whereby the Central Government rejected the<\/p>\n
application for SSS pension. Mainly it was rejected for the reason that the<\/p>\n
jail   certificate issued     by     the    Superintendent,        Central Prison,<\/p>\n
Thiruvananthapuram establishes jail suffering of only 4 months and 26<\/p>\n
days.\n<\/p>\n
       2.   The petitioner’s late husband was actively involved in the<\/p>\n
Punnapra-Vayalar struggle and an arrest warrant was issued against him by<\/p>\n
the Court pursuant to which, he went underground for six months. Later he<\/p>\n
was arrested by the Police and the First Class Magistrate Court, Cherthala<\/p>\n
tried the case as C.C. No.8\/124 M.E. and he was convicted and sentenced<\/p>\n
for six months imprisonment. It is also submitted that during the trial, her<\/p>\n
husband was in Sub Jail, Alappuzha for three months and after conviction<\/p>\n
he was imprisoned in the Central Jail, Thiruvananthapuram.<\/p>\n
       3. Ext.P1 is the true copy of the application dated 9.3.1998 and<\/p>\n
Ext.P2 is the true copy of the order of the District Collector sanctioning<\/p>\n
wpc 12538\/20010                      2<\/span><\/p>\n
State pension. Ext.P3 is the copy of the report of the Tahsildar<\/p>\n
recommending sanction for State pension. It shows that the applicant is a<\/p>\n
participant of Punnapra-Vayalar struggle and had undergone imprisonment<\/p>\n
for a total period of eight months.       Earlier, the application was not<\/p>\n
recommended and the late husband of the petitioner filed Ext.P5 review<\/p>\n
petition before the State Government. Ext.P6 certificate was also produced<\/p>\n
in support of the same, which shows the details of the case, conviction, etc.<\/p>\n
Exts.P8 and P9 are the true copies of the NARC issued from the Sub Jail,<\/p>\n
Alappuzha and the First Class Magistrate Court, Cherthala. By Ext.P10, the<\/p>\n
Central Government rejected the grant of pension which was under<\/p>\n
challenge in W.P.(C) NO.25817\/2006. The said writ petition was disposed<\/p>\n
of by Ext.P11 judgment. He died during the pendency of the said writ<\/p>\n
petition. Thereafter, again the matter was considered and Ext.P12 order<\/p>\n
has been passed.\n<\/p>\n
      4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Govt. Pleader<\/p>\n
and learned Central Govt. Standing Council.\n<\/p>\n
      5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the period of<\/p>\n
sentence was actually for six months which will be evident from the files<\/p>\n
maintained by the Collect orate, Alappuzha in connection with the sanction<\/p>\n
of State pension. The relevant files have been produced before this Court<\/p>\n
wpc 12538\/20010                        3<\/span><\/p>\n
by the learned Govt. Pleader.\n<\/p>\n
      6. The file contains the true extract of the convict register of the<\/p>\n
Central Prison, Thiruvananthapuram in respect of the husband of the<\/p>\n
petitioner. The details of the same show that he was convicted in C.C.<\/p>\n
No.8\/124 M.E. of the First Class Magistrate Court, Cherthala and the<\/p>\n
period of sentence as six months S.I. The date of sentence was 9th Dhanu,<\/p>\n
1124 and expiry of sentence was 8th Midhunam, 1124. He was released on<\/p>\n
8.11.1124 on expiry of the sentence. For easy reference, the contents of the<\/p>\n
convict register are extracted below:\n<\/p>\n
       “TRUE EXTRACT OF THE CONVICT REGISTER OF CENTRAL
\n                             PRISON, TRIVANDRUM.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n       1. Convict No.                  6<\/span>\n       2. Name with father's or\n         Husband's name                Velu Madhavan\n       3. Date of admission into\n         the jail                      12th Makaram 1124\n       4. Whether admitted by directed\n         committal or by transfer\n       5. If by transfer from what jail\n         and S.No. in that jail Register\n       6. Sex and whether married\n         or single etc.                Male - Single\n       7. Race, Religion and caste     Hindu Ezhava\n       8. Previous occupation          Cooly\n<\/pre>\n
       9. Residence:Town or village Paracheril veedu, Charamangalam
\n         Taluk and District            Thanneermukkam Thekkumbhagam,
\n                                       Cherthala.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       10.State of education etc.      Malayalam\n       11.Age on admission             32   5\" - 5\"\n<\/pre>\n
       12.Description and marks 1) A mole 1 1\/2″ below the left<\/p>\n
wpc 12538\/20010                        4<\/span><\/p>\n
       of identification                 mandible\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                      2) A mole 1″ below the left nipple\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       13.Class whether habitual
\n       or casual\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       14.Offence for which            S.9(5) r\/w\/ Sec.9(1)a of Act I of 22
\n          imprisonment\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       15.Calander No. of case and     C.C.No.8\/124 Wrt No.21 dt.9.6.124
\n                                       Ist Class Magistrate, Cherthala\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       16.Sentence                     6 (Six) months S.I.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       17.Date of of sentence           9th Dhanu 1124\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       18.Date of expiry of sentence 8th Midhunam\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       19.Result of appeal (if any)\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       20.Date of receipt of fine or
\n          intimation of payment of fine\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       21.Weight\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       22.Health\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       23.Disposal with date           Released on 8.11.1124 on expiry of
\n                                       sentence\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
       24.Date of return of warrant    8.11.1124
\n          to Court
\n                                 \/true extract\/
\n                                                          sd\/-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                                   Superintendent
\n       T\/6\/21-8-72 (100)                      Central Prison, Trivandrum.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The particulars of the above extract will show that he was sentenced for a<\/p>\n
period of six months and was released on 8.11.1124 on expiry of the<\/p>\n
sentence.\n<\/p>\n
      7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents<\/p>\n
are treating the period of conviction and sentence as one below six months,<\/p>\n
for the reason that the date of admission into the jail as 12th Makaram,<\/p>\n
1124. It is pointed out that column 23 which gives the date of release as<\/p>\n
wpc 12538\/20010                        5<\/span><\/p>\n
8.11.1124 will show that such a release was not a premature one but was<\/p>\n
after the expiry of sentence.      There was no remission for him also.<\/p>\n
Therefore, it is pointed out that even though the date of admission is 12th<\/p>\n
Makaram, 1124 (12.6.1124), since the release was after the expiry of<\/p>\n
sentence, it will be evident that he was in custody from the date of<\/p>\n
conviction at least, even though during trial also he as in custody. It is<\/p>\n
therefore submitted that the view taken by the respondents cannot be<\/p>\n
supported.\n<\/p>\n
      8. Plainly, in Ext.P12 the main reason shown is that the primary<\/p>\n
evidence, viz. the certificate issued by the Superintendent, Central Prison,<\/p>\n
Thiruvananthapuram establishes jail suffering of only 4 months and 26<\/p>\n
days. Going by para 3 of the counter affidavit, the minimum imprisonment<\/p>\n
required is of six months.       Ext.P6 certificate only gives the date of<\/p>\n
admission and the date of release. But if the details of the extract of<\/p>\n
convict register, as noticed above, are analysed, it can be seen that the<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the petitioner is right in submitting that the late husband<\/p>\n
of the petitioner had suffered sentence of six months.<\/p>\n
      9. Evidently, the date of sentence is 9th Dhanu, 1124 (corresponding<\/p>\n
to 9.5.1124) and the release was on 8.11.1124. Hence, the six months<\/p>\n
period is satisfied.  The period cannot be calculated from 12.6.1124, viz.<\/p>\n
wpc 12538\/20010                       6<\/span><\/p>\n
the date of admission since it can be evidently seen that the release was not<\/p>\n
a premature one. It is recorded in column 23 of the convict register that his<\/p>\n
release was on expiry of sentence. In that view of the matter, it can be<\/p>\n
safely concluded that the late freedom fighter was released only after the<\/p>\n
expiry of sentence of six months. The sentence was for a period of six<\/p>\n
months as evident from column 16. Hence, it is evident that he was in<\/p>\n
custody prior to the date of admission into jail.\n<\/p>\n
      10. That he is a participant in Punnapra-Vayalar struggle, is evident<\/p>\n
from Ext.P3 report of the Tahsildar also. In the judgment Ext.P11 also,<\/p>\n
these aspects have been mentioned by this Court.\n<\/p>\n
      11. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the rejection<\/p>\n
of the claim is proper in the light of the evidence produced along with the<\/p>\n
application and the recommendation of the State Government. It is pointed<\/p>\n
out that the recommendation of the State Government was not elaborate<\/p>\n
also.\n<\/p>\n
      12. In the light of the clinching evidence by way of true extract of<\/p>\n
the convict register of the Central Prison, Thiruvananthapuram, the matter<\/p>\n
need not be relegated back to the authorities concerned, especially since the<\/p>\n
original files leading to the order Ext.P2 have been produced before this<\/p>\n
Court by the learned Govt. Pleader. The true extract of the convict register<\/p>\n
wpc 12538\/20010                        7<\/span><\/p>\n
is one signed by the Superintendent, Central Prison, Thiruvananthapuram on<\/p>\n
21.8.1972.\n<\/p>\n
      13. Therefore, Ext.P12 is quashed. It is clear that in the light of the<\/p>\n
primary evidence, the applicant is eligible for grant of SSS pension. There<\/p>\n
will be a direction to the Central Government to sanction pension and grant<\/p>\n
the benefits within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy<\/p>\n
of this judgment. The entitlement of the petitioner for arrears from the date<\/p>\n
of receipt of the application, will also be considered.<\/p>\n
      The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                      (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)<\/p>\n
kav\/<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Bhargavi vs The Union Of India on 15 November, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 12538 of 2010(N) 1. BHARGAVI, W\/O.VELU MADHAVAN, AGED 81 … Petitioner Vs 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS … Respondent 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTD BY THE For Petitioner :SRI.J.OM […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-206686","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nBhargavi vs The Union Of India on 15 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bhargavi vs The Union Of India on 15 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-11-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-28T02:25:02+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\\\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bhargavi vs The Union Of India on 15 November, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-28T02:25:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1281,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010\",\"name\":\"Bhargavi vs The Union Of India on 15 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-28T02:25:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bhargavi vs The Union Of India on 15 November, 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":"Bhargavi vs The Union Of India on 15 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bhargavi vs The Union Of India on 15 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-11-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-28T02:25:02+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\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bhargavi vs The Union Of India on 15 November, 2010","datePublished":"2010-11-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-28T02:25:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010"},"wordCount":1281,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010","name":"Bhargavi vs The Union Of India on 15 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-11-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-28T02:25:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhargavi-vs-the-union-of-india-on-15-november-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bhargavi vs The Union Of India on 15 November, 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\/206686","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=206686"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/206686\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=206686"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=206686"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=206686"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}