{"id":207890,"date":"2006-10-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-10-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006"},"modified":"2015-08-07T19:45:52","modified_gmt":"2015-08-07T14:15:52","slug":"varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006","title":{"rendered":"Varadhan vs The Secretary To Government on 12 October, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
Varadhan vs The Secretary To Government on 12 October, 2006<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDated:- 12.10.2006\n\nCoram:-\n\nThe Honble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM\nand\nThe Honble Mr. Justice S.TAMILVANAN\n\n\nHabeas Corpus Petition No.735 of 2006\n\n\n\nVaradhan\t\t\t\t                ...  Petitioner\n\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\tVs.\n\n\n1.The Secretary to Government,\n   Prohibition and Excise  Department,\n   Fort St. George, Chennai-9.  \n\n2.The Commissioner of Police,\n   Greater Chennai,\n   Chennai-600 008.\t\t\t\t\t.. Respondents\n\n\n\tPetition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Habeas Corpus  to call for the records, set aside the detention order passed by the second respondent in BDFGISV No.172\/2006 dated 03.07.2006 and direct the second respondent to produce the body of the petitioner's son viz., Logu @ Loganathan, S\/o Varadhan, now confined in Central Prison, Chennai, before this Court and set him at liberty.\n\n \tFor Petitioner\t: Mrs.N.Bhuvaneswari\n\n\tFor Respondents\t: Mr.M.Babu Muthu Meeran\n\t                   Addl. Public Prosecutor\n\n\n\t\t\t\t\tO R D E R \n<\/pre>\n
\t\t(Order of the Court was made by P.SATHASIVAM,J.)\t<\/p>\n
\tThe petitioner, who is the father of the detenu, by name Logu @ Loganathan, who is detained as a ”Goonda” as contemplated under Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug Offenders, Forest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Slum Grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), by the impugned detention order dated 03.07.2006, challenges the same in this Petition.\n<\/p>\n
\t2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.\n<\/p>\n
\t3. At the foremost, the learned counsel for the petitioner,  by drawing our attention to the remand order, which is available at page 143 of the paper book supplied to the detenu, has contended that the English version of the said document and the translated copy of the remand order, which is available at page 147, made the detenu  confused because of the reference made to two different Courts viz., Judicial Magistrate, Alandur and V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, which prevented him in making effective representation.  We have verified  both the documents available at pages 143 and 144 of the paper book supplied to the detenu.  Though the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the accused  surrendered before the V Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, and the same learned Magistrate remanded him till 13.06.2006,  as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, a reading of the said order undoubtedly would confuse the mind of the detenu.  There is no clarification or explanation by any one either in the detention order or in the subsequent reply by the Government.  We  also accept the above contention.\n<\/p>\n
\t4. The learned counsel for the petitioner, by taking us through pages 70 to 74 of the booklet supplied to the detenu, has contended that  all the pages are not legible. She also contended that inspite of the specific representation to the Government, though the Government assured that  clear copies would be supplied, according to her,  the copies were not supplied to the detenu.  We have verified the relevant pages.  As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, some of the pages are not legible and readable.  Even after the direction of the Government, as rightly pointed out, the copies supplied to the detenu are not legible.  As pointed out, it is not an empty formality, particularly, when a request was made on the ground that the copies supplied are not legible. In a matter like this, when the Government assured by way of reply that legible  copies would be supplied, it is but proper  to supply the  copy of the entire order and the same must be legible and readable.  We accept the said contention also.\n<\/p>\n
\t5. The learned counsel for the petitioner, by drawing our attention to the special report of the sponsoring authority dated 27.06.2006, has submitted that  some of the information, particularly, in para 5 cannot be true.  While elaborating the above  contention, she pointed out that   the said report is dated 27.06.2006.  However in para 5, the sponsoring authority has stated that the accused persons  filed Crl.M.P.No.7167 of 2006 on 22.06.2006 before the District and Sessions Court, Chenglepet and on the orders of the Court, the same was adjourned to 04.07.2006 and thereafter  to 28.08.2006.  It is not clear as to how the sponsoring authority was able to ascertain the adjourned date viz., 28.08.2006 even on 27.06.2006.  In such circumstances, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is but proper on the part of the detaining authority to get  it clarified.  In the absence of the same, it is presumed that the detaining authority has not applied her mind  nor concentrated on the details furnished by the sponsoring authority.\n<\/p>\n
\t6. In similar circumstance, a Division Bench of this Court, while considering the unexplained discrepancies found in the special report,  has quashed the detention order on the ground of non application of mind on the part of the detaining authority viz., 2000 (2) Law Weekly (Criminal) 543 (KARTHIK VS. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, TIRUCHIRAPALLI CITY, TIRUCHIRAPALLI AND ANOTHER).   In view of the discrepancies as pointed out by us in the special report and in the absence of any clarification by the detaining authority, we are in agreement with the view expressed by the Division Bench.  Accordingly, the detention order is liable to be quashed on this ground also.\n<\/p>\n
\t7. Finally, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that inasmuch as  the detention order against two co-detenus, who are alleged to have involved in the ground case, was revoked by the Government on the opinion of the Advisory Board, the present detention in respect of the detenu  by name Logu @ Loganathan is also liable to be quashed.   He highlighted the common  features and also relied on  the earlier decision of  this Court dated 14.09.2004 rendered in HCP No.484 of 2004, wherein the Division Bench, after considering the issue raised, in depth, with reference to the opinion of the Advisory Board under Section 12(1) and the orders of the Government, has accepted the said contention and quashed the detention order.  The following conclusion in para 23 is as follows:\n<\/p>\n
“…… Where, however, the ground case is the same in respect of several detenues, how the case of a co-detenue is considered subsequently, by the Advisory Board or even the Court, is a relevant circumstance, which the State Government is required to consider at the subsequent stage of confirmation.  This is not to suggest that in every case where the Advisory Board opines regarding the release of a co-detenue detained on the basis of the same ground case,  all the co-detenues are to be released  irrespective of other  circumstances.  We are stressing upon  the fact that such a release is a relevant factor, which should be considered by the State Government and non-consideration of such relevant factor would vitiate the order of confirmation.”\n<\/p>\n
\t8. We are in respectful agreement with the said view.  As pointed out above, the learned counsel for the petitioner took pains in taking us through the factual details and allegations made against the other co-detenus as well as the detenu in this petition.  We are satisfied that  the detenu in this case also stands on the same footing.  In such circumstances, as observed by the Division Bench, the release of other  co-detenus  is a relevant factor to be considered by the Government and failure to do so would vitiate the order of confirmation.\n<\/p>\n
\t9. In the light of what is stated above, the impugned order of  detention is liable to be quashed  and accordingly, the same is quashed.  The Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed . The detenu is directed to be set at liberty forthwith from the custody unless he is required in some other case or cause.\n<\/p>\n
raa<\/p>\n
To\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/p>\n
1. The   Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Prohibition
\n    and Excise Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.\n<\/p>\n
2. The  Commissioner of Police,  Greater Chennai,  Chennai-600 008.\n<\/p>\n
3. The Superintendent, Central Prison, Chennai.\n<\/p>\n
    (In duplicate for communication to detenu)<\/p>\n
4. The Joint Secretary to Government, Public (Law and Order)
\n\tFort St. George, Chennai-9.\n<\/p>\n
5. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.\n<\/p>\n
[vsant 8277]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court Varadhan vs The Secretary To Government on 12 October, 2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated:- 12.10.2006 Coram:- The Honble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM and The Honble Mr. Justice S.TAMILVANAN Habeas Corpus Petition No.735 of 2006 Varadhan … Petitioner Vs. 1.The Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St. […]<\/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-207890","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nVaradhan vs The Secretary To Government on 12 October, 2006 - 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\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Varadhan vs The Secretary To Government on 12 October, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006\" \/>\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=\"2006-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-08-07T14:15:52+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\\\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Varadhan vs The Secretary To Government on 12 October, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-07T14:15:52+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006\"},\"wordCount\":1183,\"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\\\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006\",\"name\":\"Varadhan vs The Secretary To Government on 12 October, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-07T14:15:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Varadhan vs The Secretary To Government on 12 October, 2006\"}]},{\"@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":"Varadhan vs The Secretary To Government on 12 October, 2006 - 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\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Varadhan vs The Secretary To Government on 12 October, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-08-07T14:15:52+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\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Varadhan vs The Secretary To Government on 12 October, 2006","datePublished":"2006-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-07T14:15:52+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006"},"wordCount":1183,"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\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006","name":"Varadhan vs The Secretary To Government on 12 October, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-07T14:15:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varadhan-vs-the-secretary-to-government-on-12-october-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Varadhan vs The Secretary To Government on 12 October, 2006"}]},{"@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\/207890","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=207890"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/207890\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=207890"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=207890"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=207890"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}