{"id":223710,"date":"2011-03-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-02-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011"},"modified":"2016-01-14T09:59:46","modified_gmt":"2016-01-14T04:29:46","slug":"rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011","title":{"rendered":"Rameshbhai vs Unknown on 1 March, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Rameshbhai vs Unknown on 1 March, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A.L.Dave,&amp;Nbsp;Mr.Justice R.M.Chhaya,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/2070\/2004\t 8\/ 8\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 2070 of 2004\n \n\n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE  \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA\n \n \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo\n\t\t\tbe referred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n=========================================\n\n\n \n\nRAMESHBHAI\n@ CHIKO SOMABHAI VASAVA - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nTHE\nSTATE OF GUJARAT - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================\n \nAppearance : \nMRS\nNISHA M PARIKH for\nAppellant(s) : 1, \nMR D C SEJPAL, APP for Opponent(s) :\n1, \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 25\/02\/2011 \n\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)<\/p>\n<p>1.\tPresent<br \/>\nappeal arises out of judgement and order rendered by Sessions Court,<br \/>\nSurat, in Sessions Case         No. 84 of 2003 on 02.11.2004,<br \/>\nconvicting the appellant for the offence of murder of Maljibhai<br \/>\nVasava and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay<br \/>\na fine of Rs. 1,000\/-, in default, to undergo further simple<br \/>\nimprisonment for three months. The appellant was also convicted under<br \/>\nSection 135(1) of the Bombay Police Act and was sentenced to simple<br \/>\nimprisonment for thirty days by that very judgement.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tBrief<br \/>\nfacts of the case are that the deceased Muljibhai Maganbhai Vasava<br \/>\nwas staying near Kosad Railway Station of Choryasi Taluka, Dist.<br \/>\nSurat, in a hut alongwith his wife. On 14.04.2003, around midnight,<br \/>\nwhile he and his wife were sleeping in front of the hut made from<br \/>\nplastic-sheet, the appellant inflicted axe blows on the head and neck<br \/>\nof the deceased and ran away. He was seen by Urmilaben, wife of the<br \/>\ndeceased (Exh. 6). Urmilaben initially went to Kosamba Police Station<br \/>\nand on being informed that the incident had occurred within the<br \/>\njurisdiction of Katargam Police Station, she went to Katargam Police<br \/>\nStation and lodged the FIR. However, on receiving information through<br \/>\nother sources, the police appeared at the spot, investigation was<br \/>\nstarted. FIR of Urmilaben was recorded, evidence was collected and<br \/>\nultimately charge-sheet was filed in the Court of JMFC, Surat.<br \/>\nLearned JMFC, in turn, committed the case to the court of Sessions<br \/>\nand Sessions Case No. 84 of 2003 came to be registered.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tCharge<br \/>\nwas framed against the accused at Exh. 4 for offences punishable<br \/>\nunder Section 302 of IPC and 135 of the Bombay Police Act. The<br \/>\naccused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tAfter<br \/>\nconsidering the evidence led by the prosecution, the Sessions Court<br \/>\ncame to the conclusion that the prosecution was successful in proving<br \/>\nthe charges against the appellant and recorded conviction by the<br \/>\njudgement impugned in this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tLearned<br \/>\nadvocate, Ms. Parikh appears for the appellant. According to her, the<br \/>\nconviction is not well-founded. The eyewitness to the incident<br \/>\nUrmilaben had admitted in her cross-examination that she saw only the<br \/>\nback of the assailant. The incident had occurred around midnight, and<br \/>\ntherefore, she could not have fixed the identity correctly. Ms.<br \/>\nParikh submitted the possibility of a mistake in fixing the identity<br \/>\nof the assailant as the accused<br \/>\ncannot be ruled out. Ms. Parikh submitted further that the<br \/>\ninvestigation is also not properly done. It has come in evidence that<br \/>\nthe police reached the place of incident even before the FIR was<br \/>\nregistered and it has also come in evidence that there was no prior<br \/>\nintimation to the police. The question is, how the police reached the<br \/>\nplace of incident.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tMs.\n<\/p>\n<p>Parikh submitted that Urmilaben, in her evidence, has indicated that,<br \/>\nif she had shouted, her voice could have been heard by the police at<br \/>\nthe Kosamba Police Station. Instead of doing that she has gone to<br \/>\nKosamba Police Station and then to Katargam Police Station. There is<br \/>\ninconsistency in evidence on the question whether people assembled at<br \/>\nthe place of incident or not and all these discrepancies are ignored<br \/>\nby the Trial Court while recording conviction. Ms. Parikh submitted<br \/>\nthat the police did not bother to take the finger prints on the axe<br \/>\nso as to verify whether the same would match with the finger prints<br \/>\nof the accused or not, and therefore, the investigation is weak. Ms.<br \/>\nParikh, therefore, submitted that the appeal may be allowed by<br \/>\nsetting aside the judgement and order of conviction and sentence.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tLearned<br \/>\nAPP, Mr. D.C.Sejpal has opposed the appeal.       Mr. Sejpal<br \/>\nsubmitted that all the contentions raised by learned advocate for the<br \/>\nappellant would not weaken or abrogate the evidence of Urmilaben, the<br \/>\neyewitness. Whatever lapses may be there in the investigation are<br \/>\nonly procedural and would not affect the evidence in the main. Mr.<br \/>\nSejpal submitted that it has come in evidence that there was moon<br \/>\nlight and in that moon light Urmilaben identified the assailant to be<br \/>\nthe accused- appellant. He submitted that he was chased to an extent,<br \/>\nand while escaping, he had thrown the axe which was recovered later<br \/>\non. The learned APP submitted that blood stained shirt of the<br \/>\naccused-appellant was also recovered. The blood on the shirt was<br \/>\nfound to be that of the deceased and the accused has not tendered any<br \/>\nexplanation for presence of blood on his clothes particularly, when<br \/>\nthere was no injury on his person.         Mr. Sejpal submitted that<br \/>\nevidence of Urmilaben and presence of blood on clothes of the<br \/>\naccused-appellant would clinch the issue of identity and would<br \/>\nrule-out any possibility of any mistake in identification. Mr. Sejpal<br \/>\nadded further that parties were known to each other.  There was a<br \/>\nquarrel earlier on some monetary settlement, and therefore, it would<br \/>\nhave been easier for the eyewitness to identify the appellant. Mr.<br \/>\nSejpal, therefore, submitted that the appeal may be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tWe<br \/>\nhave examined the record and proceedings in the context of rival side<br \/>\nsubmissions. We find that the incident has occurred around midnight.<br \/>\nThe deceased and his wife were poor rustic hutment dwellers. They<br \/>\nwere staying in a hut made from plastic-sheet and even in the month<br \/>\nof January, they were required to sleep outside the hut. The<br \/>\nilliteracy and innocence of the victim&#8217;s wife, Urmilaben, is<br \/>\nreflected by the fact that she, after the incident, rushed to Kosamba<br \/>\nPolice Station, rather than Katargam Police Station under whose<br \/>\njurisdiction the incident occurred. She was not even aware under<br \/>\nwhose jurisdiction the hutment was located.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tUpon<br \/>\nreading the evidence of Urmilaben (Exh. 6), we find that she was<br \/>\nsleeping next to her husband and she, in turn, says that the accused,<br \/>\nafter giving axe blows to her husband, ran away. She chased him to an<br \/>\nextent. She was awaken by the shout of her husband and she saw the<br \/>\naccused escaping. She says that there was moonlight sufficient to<br \/>\nidentify the accused. Her husband died on the spot. The dead body was<br \/>\ntaken to Surat.               Postmortem was performed and the cause<br \/>\nfor assault was some monetary dispute. The eyewitness has been<br \/>\ncross-examined at length. During the corss-examination, she denied<br \/>\nthe suggestion that she had not stated in her FIR that there was<br \/>\nmoonlit night and she identified the assailant as accused in that<br \/>\nmoonlight. The FIR is on record at Exh. 7 and on going through the<br \/>\nsame, it is confirmed that it is not stated that it was a moonlit<br \/>\nnight. This omission, therefore, is duly proved by the defence, but,<br \/>\nin our view, it would be of no consequence because the FIR is not<br \/>\nsupposed to give all minute details. The purpose of FIR is to set the<br \/>\ncriminal investigation machinery in motion. It is not supposed to be<br \/>\nthe magna carta. At the relevant time, the first informant might not<br \/>\nhave realized the importance of the night being a moonlit night, and<br \/>\ntherefore, might not have stated in the FIR. That would not render<br \/>\nher deposition doubtful particularly,  when there is a strong<br \/>\ncorroborative piece of evidence in form of FSL report, which shows<br \/>\nthat shirt of the accused, which was seized by the police, carried<br \/>\nblood stains of human blood of B Group, which was the blood group of<br \/>\nthe deceased. The accused appellant had no injury on his person and<br \/>\nit would, therefore, be expected of him to explain presence of blood<br \/>\non his clothes, which he has failed to do. The first informant, as<br \/>\nalready recorded, is a rustic villager coming from the down trodden<br \/>\nstrata of the society, and therefore, also a concession is required<br \/>\nto be given to her for not stating in the FIR that there was a<br \/>\nmoonlit night.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tThe<br \/>\ncontention that police reached the place of incident before the<br \/>\nlodgment of FIR and non-explanation by the prosecution about the same<br \/>\ndoes not call for a serious consideration; because it relates to a<br \/>\nsituation subsequent to incident. The evidence would show that people<br \/>\nhad gathered. The evidence would also show that first informant went<br \/>\nto Kosamba Police Station and then to Katargam Police Station and no<br \/>\none could have informed the police about the incident or may be some<br \/>\nincident having occurred near Kosamba Railway Station, and, in turn,<br \/>\npolice may have reached place. It is nobody&#8217;s case that any evidence<br \/>\nhas been tampered with.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tAs<br \/>\nregards the inconsistency on question whether people had assembled or<br \/>\nnot, the eyewitness, in terms,  stated that people had assembled and<br \/>\nthen she left for police station, leaving the dead body of the victim<br \/>\nunder their protection or supervision. It is not an unknown fact, and<br \/>\njudicial notice can be taken of that fact, that in places where<br \/>\npeople dwell in hutments any such incident would immediately be<br \/>\nnoticed by the people staying around and they would assemble. It<br \/>\nwould be an altogether different situation where people, though they<br \/>\nmight have assembled and have known something about the incident, yet<br \/>\nthey would not co-operate with the investigating agency for obvious<br \/>\nreasons. The Common man has yet not come out of the fear complex. It<br \/>\nhas to be noted that no lady would have left the dead body unattended<br \/>\nwhile going to the police and anyone of them could have been informed<br \/>\nthe police something about the incident and the police may have come.<br \/>\nThat does not make any difference so far as the evidence of<br \/>\neyewitness and FSL is concerned.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tIt<br \/>\nwas also contended that the weapon axe was not examined for presence<br \/>\nor absence of finger print but that hardly makes any difference for<br \/>\nthe reason that the weapon was seized from the place where the<br \/>\nappellant had escaped throwing the axe and the axe was found to<br \/>\ncontain human blood of Group B which was, the blood group of the<br \/>\ndeceased and the nexus between the appellant and the incident is<br \/>\nstrongly established by evidence of Urmilaben (Exh. 6) and FSL report<br \/>\nin respect of Shirt of the accused containing human blood, which is<br \/>\nat Exh. 47.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tThe<br \/>\nsum total of the foregoing discussion is that the Trial Court has<br \/>\nproperly appreciated the evidence and has held the appellant guilty.<br \/>\nWe do not find any merits in the appeal. No interference is called<br \/>\nfor in exercise of our appellate powers. The appeal must fail and<br \/>\nstands dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>[A.L.DAVE,<br \/>\nJ.]<\/p>\n<p>[R.M.CHHAYA,<br \/>\nJ.]<\/p>\n<p>JYOTI<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Rameshbhai vs Unknown on 1 March, 2011 Author: A.L.Dave,&amp;Nbsp;Mr.Justice R.M.Chhaya,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/2070\/2004 8\/ 8 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2070 of 2004 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA ========================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers [&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-223710","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Rameshbhai vs Unknown on 1 March, 2011 - 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\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rameshbhai vs Unknown on 1 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-02-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-14T04:29:46+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Rameshbhai vs Unknown on 1 March, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-14T04:29:46+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1762,\"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\\\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011\",\"name\":\"Rameshbhai vs Unknown on 1 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-14T04:29:46+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Rameshbhai vs Unknown on 1 March, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Rameshbhai vs Unknown on 1 March, 2011 - 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\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rameshbhai vs Unknown on 1 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-02-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-14T04:29:46+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Rameshbhai vs Unknown on 1 March, 2011","datePublished":"2011-02-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-14T04:29:46+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011"},"wordCount":1762,"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\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011","name":"Rameshbhai vs Unknown on 1 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-02-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-14T04:29:46+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rameshbhai-vs-unknown-on-1-march-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Rameshbhai vs Unknown on 1 March, 2011"}]},{"@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\/223710","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=223710"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/223710\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=223710"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=223710"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=223710"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}