{"id":230972,"date":"2008-04-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-04-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008"},"modified":"2015-07-10T05:32:06","modified_gmt":"2015-07-10T00:02:06","slug":"oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008","title":{"rendered":"Oma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 21 April, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Oma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 21 April, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: . A Pasayat<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, P. Sathasivam<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  905 of 2002\n\nPETITIONER:\nOma Ram\n\nRESPONDENT:\nState of Rajasthan and Ors\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 21\/04\/2008\n\nBENCH:\nDr. ARIJIT PASAYAT &amp; P. SATHASIVAM\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T<br \/>\nREPORTABLE<\/p>\n<p>CIVIL APPEAL NO. 905 of  2002<br \/>\nWith<br \/>\n(CIVIL APPEAL NO.291 OF 2004, CIVIL APPEAL NO.3575 OF<br \/>\n2002, CIVIL APPEAL NO.4562 of 2002 and CIVIL APPEAL<br \/>\nNO.906 of 2002)<\/p>\n<p>Dr. ARIJTI PASAYAT, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>1.\tIn all these appeals challenge is to the judgment of the<br \/>\nRajasthan High Court at Jodhpur dismissing the writ petitions<br \/>\nfiled under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India,<br \/>\n1950 (in short the &#8216;Constitution&#8217;).  Challenge in the writ<br \/>\npetitions was to the vires of certain provision of the Rajasthan<br \/>\nExcise Act, 1950 (in short the &#8216;Act&#8217;).  Essentially the prayers<br \/>\nwere as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;(a) appropriate writ, order or direction,<br \/>\nincorporation of Sec. 54(ka) and Sub-Sections (4) to<br \/>\n(9) in Section 69 of the Excise Act may be declared<br \/>\nultra-vires and be struck down;\n<\/p>\n<p>(b) by an appropriate writ, order or direction,<br \/>\namendment in the Excise Act, 1950 by<br \/>\nincorporation of Section 9B may be declared ultra-<br \/>\nvires and be struck down;\n<\/p>\n<p>(c) by a further appropriate, writ, order or direction<br \/>\nimpugned order dated 16.5.2000, passed by<br \/>\nrespondent No. 2 may be declared invalid and may<br \/>\nbe quashed and set aside;\n<\/p>\n<p>(d) Pending decision, if any further order is made or<br \/>\naction is taken prejudicial to the interest of the<br \/>\npetitioner, the same may also be quashed and set<br \/>\naside.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe contentions raised on behalf of the appellant in the<br \/>\nwrit petitions challenging the vires of the provisions were<br \/>\nfounded on the following allegations:\n<\/p>\n<p>1.\tThe provisions of the amendment are<br \/>\ncontrary to Article 254 of the Constitution<br \/>\nand without the assent of the President<br \/>\nthose are ultra vires;\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tthe amended provisions are repugnant to<br \/>\nthe provisions of the Code of Criminal<br \/>\nProcedure and the Code of Civil Procedure;\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tThe amended provisions confer unguided<br \/>\npowers on the Excise Authorities;\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tBy Section 9(B) the remedy of judicial<br \/>\nreview is taken away and the petitioner is<br \/>\nremediless.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tThe respondent-State prayed for dismissal of the writ<br \/>\npetition on the ground that the Act was within the legislative<br \/>\ncompetence of the State Government under Item 8 read with<br \/>\nItems 64 &amp; 65 of List II of the 7th Schedule of the Constitution<br \/>\nand is a special Act dealing with right of the State to regulate<br \/>\nproduction, transfer, storage, possession and sale of liquor or<br \/>\nintoxicating drugs.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tThe High Court noted that 75 similar petitions were filed<br \/>\nbefore the Jaipur Bench raising similar contentions.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tFollowing the view of the Jaipur Bench the Writ Petitions<br \/>\nwere dismissed by the impugned judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tIn support of the appeals, it was submitted that as per<br \/>\nthe provisions of Sections 451 to 457 of the Code of Criminal<br \/>\nProcedure, 1973 (in short the &#8216;Cr.P.C&#8217;), the criminal court has<br \/>\njurisdiction to release any property seized or recovered during<br \/>\nany enquiry or trial.  By the insertion of Section 54(A) of the<br \/>\nRajasthan Excise Amendment Ordinance, 2000 which was<br \/>\nlater on substituted by the Amendment Act Along with Section<br \/>\n54A,  Section 69 has also been amended and as per amended<br \/>\nsub section (6) of Section 69 it has been provided that<br \/>\nwhenever any means of conveyance is seized in connection<br \/>\nwith commission of offence under the Act, the Excise<br \/>\nCommissioner or any officer authorized in this behalf by the<br \/>\nState Government shall have and notwithstanding anything<br \/>\ncontained in any law for the time being in force, any Court,<br \/>\nTribunal or other Authority shall not have jurisdiction to make<br \/>\norder with regard to the possession, delivery, disposal or<br \/>\nrelease of such conveyance.  Grievance was that in view of the<br \/>\naforesaid provisions the criminal courts were not invoking<br \/>\njurisdiction and the power of the court has been taken away.<br \/>\nChallenge to Section 54A and Section 69(6) were made on the<br \/>\nground that they are unconstitutional, arbitrary, unreasonable<br \/>\nand violative of Articles 14, 19, 20, 21 and 301 of the<br \/>\nConstitution.  It was submitted that the powers conferred on<br \/>\njudicial courts by virtue of Sections 451 to 457 Cr.P.C. has<br \/>\nbeen curtailed or have been taken away and indirectly the<br \/>\npower of revision of Sessions judge or the High Court and<br \/>\ninherent power of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.<br \/>\nhas been curtailed.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\t In response, learned counsel for the State made the<br \/>\nreference to Sections 4,5, &amp; 9 Cr.P.C. and Section 41 of the<br \/>\nIndian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the &#8216;IPC&#8217;).\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tThe objects and reasons of the Rajasthan Excise<br \/>\nAmendment Act, 2000 need to be noted. The same is as<br \/>\nfollows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Statement of Objects and Reasons:\n<\/p>\n<p>The incidence of unauthorised<br \/>\ntransportation of excisable articles had<br \/>\nincreased in recent past and it was noticed<br \/>\nthat owners of such vehicles were indulging in<br \/>\nthese activities with impunity. It was also<br \/>\nnoticed that the vehicles indulging in such<br \/>\ntransportation even after seizure for<br \/>\ncommission of the offence were released from<br \/>\ncourts and were again used for unauthorised<br \/>\ntransportation of exciseable articles.  To check<br \/>\nthis menace, it was considered necessary to<br \/>\nprovide that  if any means of -conveyance is<br \/>\nused in commission of offence under the<br \/>\nRajasthan Excise Act, 1950, then the same<br \/>\nshall be liable to be confiscated by order of the<br \/>\nExcise Commissioner or the Officer, not below<br \/>\nthe rank of District Excise Officer as may be<br \/>\nauthorized by the State Government in this<br \/>\nbehalf and the owner of such a means of<br \/>\nconveyance shall be, deemed to be guilty of<br \/>\noffence for the commission of which, the said<br \/>\nmeans of conveyance was used.  For achieving<br \/>\nthese purposes, Section 69 of the Rajasthan<br \/>\nExcise Act was proposed to be suitably<br \/>\namended and a new Section 54A was proposed<br \/>\nto be inserted.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>The amended Section 54 reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>-,\t<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;54. Penalty for unlawful import, export,<br \/>\ntransport, manufacture, possession etc.- ,<\/p>\n<p>Whoever in contravention of this Act or of any<br \/>\nrule or order made or of any licence, permit or<br \/>\npass granted, thereunder<\/p>\n<p>(a)\timports, exports, transports,  manufactures,<br \/>\ncollects, sells or possesses any excisable article, or,<\/p>\n<p>(b)\tcultivates any hemp plant (Cannabis Sativa);<br \/>\nor\n<\/p>\n<p>(c)\tconstructs or works any distillery, pot still or<br \/>\nbrewery; or\n<\/p>\n<p>(d)\tuses, keeps or has in his possession any<br \/>\nmaterials stills, utensil, implements or apparatus<br \/>\nwhatsoever for the  purpose of manufacturing any<br \/>\nexcisable article other than tari; or removes any excisable<br \/>\narticles for any distillery potstill,(brewery) or warehouse<br \/>\nestablished or licensed under this Act or\n<\/p>\n<p>(e)\tbottles any liquor for the purposes of sale; or\n<\/p>\n<p>(f)\ttaps or draws tari from any tari producing<br \/>\ntree;\n<\/p>\n<p>shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which<br \/>\nmay extend to three years and with fine which may<br \/>\nextend to two thousand rupees.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tSections 54A and 69 read as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;54-A. Owner of animal, cart, vessel, raft, motor<br \/>\nvehicle or any other means of conveyance deemed to<br \/>\nbe guilty in certain cases. Where any animal, cart,<br \/>\nvessel, raft, motor, vehicle or any other means of<br \/>\nconveyance is used in the commission of an offence<br \/>\nunder this Act, and is liable to confiscation, the<br \/>\nowner thereof, except, in case of a motor vehicle -or<br \/>\nother, means of conveyance being owned by the<br \/>\nCentral, Government or any State Government or<br \/>\nany of the undertakings, shall be deemed to be<br \/>\nguilty of such offence and such owner shall be liable<br \/>\nto be proceeded and be- punished accordingly<br \/>\nunless he satisfies the court that he had no reason<br \/>\nto believe that such offence was being  or likely to<br \/>\nbe committed and he had exercised due care in the<br \/>\nprevention of the commission of such an offence.\n<\/p>\n<p>69. \tWhat things are liable to confiscation- (1)<br \/>\nWhenever an offence punishable under this Act has<br \/>\nbeen committed<\/p>\n<p>(a)  every excisable article in respect of which such<br \/>\noffence has been committed.\n<\/p>\n<p>(b) every still, utensil, implement or apparatus and<br \/>\nall materials by means of which such offence has<br \/>\nbeen committed,<\/p>\n<p>(c) every excisable article lawfully imported<br \/>\ntransported, manufactured held in possession or<br \/>\nsold alongwith or in addition to any excisable article<br \/>\nliable to confiscation under clause (a),<\/p>\n<p>(d), every receptacle, package or covering in which<br \/>\nany article as aforesaid or any materials, still,<br \/>\nutensil, implement or apparatus is or are found<br \/>\ntogether with the other contents &#8211;(if  any) of such<br \/>\nreceptacle or package, and<\/p>\n<p>(e) every animal, cart,  vessel, raft or other<br \/>\nconveyance  \tused in carrying such receptacle or<br \/>\npackage, shall be liable to confiscation.\n<\/p>\n<p>(2) When in the trial of any offence punishable<br \/>\nunder this Act the Magistrate decides that anything<br \/>\nis liable to confiscation under clause (a) to (d) of<br \/>\nsub-sec (1) he may order confiscation.\n<\/p>\n<p>Provided that (in case of a thing other than an<br \/>\nexcisable article he may, in lieu of ordering<br \/>\nconfiscation, give) the owner of the thing liable to be<br \/>\nconfiscated an option to pay any such fine as the<br \/>\nMagistrate thinks fit.\n<\/p>\n<p>(3) When anything mentioned in sub-section (1) is<br \/>\nfound in circumstances which afford reason to<br \/>\nbelieve that an offence under this Act has been<br \/>\ncommitted in respect or by, means thereof, or when<br \/>\nsuch an offence has been, committed and the<br \/>\noffender is not known or cannot be found, the<br \/>\nExcise Commissioner may order confiscation of the<br \/>\nsame:\n<\/p>\n<p>Provided that no such order shall be made<br \/>\nuntil the expiration of one month from the date of<br \/>\nseizing the thing or animal in question or without<br \/>\nhearing the person (if any) claiming any right<br \/>\nthereto, and the evidence (if any) which he produces<br \/>\nin support of the claim:\n<\/p>\n<p>Provided further that if the thing in question is<br \/>\nliable to speedy and natural decay, if the Excise<br \/>\nCommissioner is of opinion that the sale of the thing<br \/>\nor animal in question would be for the benefit of its<br \/>\nowner, he may at any time direct it to be sold;  and<br \/>\nthe provisions of this section shall so far as may be,<br \/>\napply to the net proceeds of such sale.\n<\/p>\n<p>(4)\tWhere any means of conveyance referred to in<br \/>\nclause (e) of sub-section (1) is seized in connection<br \/>\nwith the commission of any offence under this Act,<br \/>\na report of such seizure shall, without unreasonable<br \/>\ndelay, be made by the person seizing to the Excise<br \/>\nCommissioner or to the officer, not below the rank<br \/>\nof the District Excise Officer, as may be duly<br \/>\nauthorized by the State Government in this behalf<br \/>\nand whether or not a prosecution is instituted for<br \/>\ncommission of such an offence, the Excise<br \/>\nCommissioner or the officer authorized in this<br \/>\nbehalf by the State Government, having jurisdiction<br \/>\nover the area where the said means of conveyance<br \/>\nwas seized, may, if satisfied that the said means of<br \/>\nconveyance was used for commission of offence<br \/>\nunder this Act, order confiscation of the said means<br \/>\nof conveyance.\n<\/p>\n<p>Provided that before ordering confiscation of<br \/>\nthe said means of conveyance a reasonable<br \/>\nopportunity of being. heard shall be afforded to the<br \/>\nowner of the said means of conveyance and if such<br \/>\nowner satisfies the Excise Commissioner or the<br \/>\nofficer authorised by the State Government in this<br \/>\nbehalf that he had no reason to believe that such<br \/>\noffence was being or likely to be committed and he<br \/>\nhad exercised due care in the prevention of the<br \/>\ncommission of such an offence, the Excise<br \/>\nCommissioner or the officer authorised by the State<br \/>\nGovernment in this behalf, may not confiscate the<br \/>\nsaid means of conveyance.\n<\/p>\n<p>Provided further that where such means of<br \/>\nconveyance is owned by the Central Government or<br \/>\nany State Government or any of their undertaking,<br \/>\nno order of confiscation of-such means of<br \/>\nconveyance shall be passed by the Excise<br \/>\nCommissioner or the officer authorised by the State<br \/>\nGovernment in this behalf and the matter shall be<br \/>\nreferred to the State Government by the Excise<br \/>\nCommissioner or the officer authorised by the State<br \/>\nGovernment -in this behalf, for making such orders<br \/>\nregarding means of conveyance as the State<br \/>\nGovernment may deem fit.\n<\/p>\n<p>Provided also that before ordering confiscation<br \/>\nunder this, sub-section the owner of the means of<br \/>\nconveyance, referred to in clause (e) of sub-sec. (1),<br \/>\nmay be given an option to pay in lieu of<br \/>\nconfiscation, a fine not exceeding the market price<br \/>\nof such means of conveyance.\n<\/p>\n<p>(5) \tAny person aggrieved by an order of<br \/>\nconfiscation made under sub-sec. (4) may within<br \/>\nsixty days from the date of communication to him of<br \/>\nsuch order, appeal to the Divisional Commissioner<br \/>\nand the Divisional Commissioner after giving<br \/>\nopportunity to the appellant to be heard, shall pass<br \/>\nsuch order as it may think fit, confirming, modifying<br \/>\nor annulling the order appealed against.\n<\/p>\n<p>(6)\tWhenever any means of conveyance as referred<br \/>\nto in clause (e) of sub-section  (1) is seized in<br \/>\nconnection with commission of an offence under<br \/>\nthis Act, the Excise Commissioner or any officer<br \/>\nauthorised in this behalf by the State Government<br \/>\nshall have, and, notwithstanding anything<br \/>\ncontained in any law for the time being in force any<br \/>\ncourt, tribunal or other authority shall not have<br \/>\njurisdiction to make order with regard to the<br \/>\npossession, delivery, disposal, release of such<br \/>\nmeans  of conveyance.\n<\/p>\n<p>(7)\tWhere the Excise Commissioner or the officer<br \/>\nauthorised by the State government in this behalf is<br \/>\nof the opinion that it is expedient in public interest<br \/>\nor for the benefit of its owner that the means of<br \/>\nconveyance as referred to in clause (e) of sub-sec.<br \/>\n(1), seized for commission of offence under this Act<br \/>\nbe sold by public auction, he may at anytime direct<br \/>\nit to be sold.\n<\/p>\n<p>(8) Where any means of conveyance is sold, as<br \/>\naforesaid, the sale proceeds thereof, after deduction<br \/>\nof the expenses of such sale or auction or other<br \/>\nincidental expenses relating thereto and in other<br \/>\ncases, the means of conveyance which was seized or<br \/>\nthe amount of fine paid in lieu of its confiscation,<br \/>\nshall-\n<\/p>\n<p>(a)\twhere no order of confiscation is ultimately<br \/>\npassed by the Excise Commissioner or the<br \/>\nofficer authorized by the State Government<br \/>\nin this behalf or, <\/p>\n<p>(b) where an order passed on appeal under<br \/>\nsub-sec. (5) so requires; or<\/p>\n<p>(c) where in a prosecution instituted for<br \/>\ncommission of offence under this Act in<br \/>\nrespect of which an order of confiscation has<br \/>\nbeen made under this section, the person<br \/>\nconcerned is acquitted,<\/p>\n<p>be paid, returned or refunded, as the case may<br \/>\nbe, to its owner:\n<\/p>\n<p>Provided that no interest shall be payable on the<br \/>\namount to be paid or refunded under this sub-<br \/>\nsection.\n<\/p>\n<p>any order of confiscation made by the Excise<br \/>\nCommissioner or any officer authorised by the<br \/>\nState Government in this behalf, shall not prevent<br \/>\nthe infliction of any `punishment to which the<br \/>\nperson affected thereby is liable under this Act.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>Section 9B of the Act which was introduced in the<br \/>\nGazette Notification dated 31.7.1998 reads as follows:<br \/>\n&#8220;Bar of jurisdiction of civil courts;<br \/>\nNo Civil Court shall have jurisdiction to<br \/>\nentertain any suit or proceeding to set aside or<br \/>\nmodify;\n<\/p>\n<p>(a)\tany original order passed by any of the<br \/>\nofficer competent to do so under the provisions<br \/>\nof this Act;\n<\/p>\n<p>(b)\tany order passed under or referred to in<br \/>\nSection 9A.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>Article 254 of the Constitution reads as follows:<br \/>\n&#8220;(1) If any provision of a law made by the<br \/>\nlegislature of a State is repugnant to any<br \/>\nprovision of a law made by Parliament which<br \/>\nParliament is competent to enact, or to any,;<br \/>\nprovision of an existing law with respect to one<br \/>\nof the matters enumerated in the  Concurrent<br \/>\nList, then, subject to the Provisions of clause<br \/>\n(2),the law made by Parliament, whether passed<br \/>\nbefore or after the law made by the Legislature<br \/>\nof such State, or, as the case may be, the<br \/>\nexisting law, shall prevail and the law made by<br \/>\nthe Legislature of the State shall, to the extent<br \/>\nof the repugnancy be void.\n<\/p>\n<p>(2) Where a law made by the Legislature of a<br \/>\nState with respect to one of the matters<br \/>\nenumerated in the Concurrent List contains<br \/>\nany provision repugnant to the provisions of<br \/>\nan earlier law made by Parliament, or an<br \/>\nexisting law with respect to that matter, then,<br \/>\nthe law so made by the Legislature of such<br \/>\nState shall, if it has been, .reserved for the<br \/>\nconsideration of the President and has<br \/>\nreceived his assent, prevail in that State<\/p>\n<p>Provided that nothing in this clause shall<br \/>\nprevent Parliament from enacting at any time<br \/>\nany law with respect to the same matter<br \/>\nincluding a law adding to, amending, varying<br \/>\nor repealing the law so made by the<br \/>\nLegislature of the State.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tSo far as Amendment Act, 2000 is concerned it received<br \/>\nassent of the Governor on 3.4.2000 by which Section 54A was<br \/>\ninserted and amendments were made in Section 69 of the<br \/>\nexisting provisions and sub-sections 4 to 9 were inserted and<br \/>\nearlier amendments were made in Section 9-B which has been<br \/>\nquoted above.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tIn P.N. Krishna Lal &amp; Ors. v. Govt. of Kerala &amp; Anr.(1995<br \/>\n(suppl.) 2 SCC 187) it was observed at para 12 as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;12. The scheme of the Act and the<br \/>\nAmendment Act is a consistent whole,<br \/>\nregulating production, manufacture,<br \/>\npossession, transport, purchase or sale of<br \/>\nintoxicating liquors. The Amendment Act was<br \/>\nenacted to prohibit mixing or permitting to mix<br \/>\nmethanol in arrack or intoxicating drug or<br \/>\nfailure to take reasonable precautions to prevent<br \/>\nacts or omissions, of mixing methanol in arrack<br \/>\nor intoxicating drug or to be in possession<br \/>\nthereof with knowledge of its adulteration or to<br \/>\nprevent deleterious effect on the health of the<br \/>\nconsumers to prevent grievous hurt to human<br \/>\nbeings or their death. As a part of it, the burden<br \/>\nof proof of the ingredients of the offence being<br \/>\nwithin the special knowledge of the accused has<br \/>\nalso been laid on the accused person. Therefore,<br \/>\nthough incidentally it trenches into some of the<br \/>\nprovisions of the Evidence Act, the Indian Penal<br \/>\nCode and the Code, in its pith and substance, it<br \/>\nis an integral scheme of the Act, which falls<br \/>\nwithin Entry 8 read with Entries 64 and 65 of<br \/>\nList II of the Seventh Schedule of the<br \/>\nConstitution. Under Article 246(3), the State<br \/>\nlegislature was competent to enact the<br \/>\nAmendment Act. Therefore, the assent of the<br \/>\nPresident is not necessary. Even assuming that<br \/>\nsome of the provisions incidentally trespass into<br \/>\nthe field of operation of the Central provisions<br \/>\nfalling in the Concurrent List, which empower<br \/>\nboth Parliament and the State legislatures to<br \/>\nenact the law, the assent given by the President<br \/>\nmade Sections 57-A and 57-B valid. The Gazette<br \/>\nNotification of the Amendment Act has been<br \/>\nplaced before us which shows that the President<br \/>\nhas given his assent to the Amendment Act on<br \/>\n1-12-1984. Therefore, by operation of proviso to<br \/>\nclause (2) of Article 254, the Amendment Act<br \/>\nprevails over the relevant provisions in the<br \/>\nIndian Evidence Act, IPC and the Code in<br \/>\nrelation to the State of Kerala.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tThis is a complete answer to most of the submissions<br \/>\nmade by the appellants.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\t<a href=\"\/doc\/1404306\/\">In State of Karnataka v. K. Krishnan<\/a> (2000(7) SCC 80)<br \/>\nthis court while considering a case of forest offence under the<br \/>\nKarnataka Forest Act, 1963, observed that the provisions of<br \/>\nthe Act should be strictly complied with and generally the<br \/>\nseized forest produce and the vehicle, boat, tools etc. used in<br \/>\ncommission of forest offence should not be released and even<br \/>\nif the Court is allowed to release the same, the authorized<br \/>\nofficer must specify reasons therefor and must insist on<br \/>\nfurnishing of bank guarantee as the minimum condition.  In<br \/>\nthat case the forest produce was transported in violation of the<br \/>\nprovisions of the Act.  The High Court had modified the<br \/>\nconditions regarding bank guarantee stipulated by the<br \/>\nauthorized officer and instead had directed to furnish two like<br \/>\nsureties to the extent of Rs.1,50,000\/- each for the purpose of<br \/>\ngetting interim custody of the vehicle.  This Court held that<br \/>\nthe High Court had adopted a casual approach and its order<br \/>\nwas contrary to law.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.\tCertain provisions of the Essential Commodities Act,<br \/>\n1955 have relevance.  Section 6A deals with confiscation of<br \/>\nfood grains, edible oil seeds and edible oils. Section 6B deals<br \/>\nwith issue of show cause notice before confiscation of food<br \/>\ngrains etc.  Section 6E deals with bar of jurisdiction in certain<br \/>\ncases.  Section 6E has been substituted to provide that except<br \/>\nCollector or State Government, all other authorities, judicial or<br \/>\notherwise, would be debarred from making any order with<br \/>\nregard to the possession, delivery, disposal or distribution of<br \/>\nany essential commodity, seized in pursuance of an order<br \/>\nmade under Section 3.  Thus a Magistrate has no jurisdiction<br \/>\nto grant relief against seizure under Section 457 Cr.P.C.<br \/>\nSection 6A provides for confiscation of essential commodities<br \/>\nseized in pursuance of an order made under Section 3.<br \/>\nCollector of the district of the Presidency Town, in which such<br \/>\ncommodity is seized, may order confiscation, if he is satisfied<br \/>\nthat there has been a contravention of such an order.  But, no<br \/>\norder of confiscation shall be made under this Section, if the<br \/>\nseized essential commodity has been produced by the<br \/>\nproducer, without prejudice to any action, which may be taken<br \/>\nunder any other provision of this Act.  Section 6B of the Act<br \/>\nprovides the procedure to be adopted by the Collector, before<br \/>\npassing order for confiscation, which provides that after<br \/>\nissuing of notice, an opportunity has to be given to the<br \/>\naggrieved party, for contesting the same.  The Collector, after<br \/>\ngiving him a hearing, has to decide the objection and pass an<br \/>\norder either confiscating the property or refusing to confiscate<br \/>\nthe property.\n<\/p>\n<p>14.\tIn case <a href=\"\/doc\/1862709\/\">Shambhu Dayal Agarwala v. State of West Bengal<br \/>\n&amp; Anr.<\/a> (1990 (3) SCC 549) this Court held that whenever any<br \/>\nessential commodity is seized, pending confiscation under<br \/>\nSection 6A, the Collector has no power to order release of the<br \/>\ncommodity in favour of the owner.  Having regard to the<br \/>\nscheme of the Act, the object and purpose of the statute and<br \/>\nthe mischief it seeks to guard, this Court held that the word<br \/>\n&#8220;release&#8221; in Section 6E is used in the limited sense of release<br \/>\nfor sale etc., so that the same becomes available to the<br \/>\nconsumer public.  It was further held:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;No unqualified and unrestricted power<br \/>\nhas been conferred on the Collector of<br \/>\nreleasing the commodity in the sense of<br \/>\nreturning it to the owner or person from whom<br \/>\nit was seized even before the proceeding for<br \/>\nconfiscation stood completed and before the<br \/>\ntermination of the prosecution in acquittal of<br \/>\nthe offender.  Such a view would render clause\n<\/p>\n<p>(b) of Section 7(1) totally nugatory and would<br \/>\ncompletely defeat the purpose and object of the<br \/>\nAct.  The view that the Act itself contemplates<br \/>\na situation which would render Section 7(1)(b)<br \/>\notiose where the essential commodity is<br \/>\ndisposed of by the Collector under Section<br \/>\n6A(2) is misconceived.  Section 6A does not<br \/>\nempower the Collector to give an option to pay,<br \/>\nin lieu of confiscation of essential commodity a<br \/>\nfine not exceeding the market value of the<br \/>\ncommodity on the date of seizure, as in the<br \/>\ncase of any animal, vehicle, vessel or other<br \/>\nconveyance seized along with the essential<br \/>\ncommodity.  Only a limited power of sale of the<br \/>\ncommodity in the manner prescribed by<br \/>\nSection 6A the essential commodity has to be<br \/>\nexercised in public interest for maintaining the<br \/>\nsupplies and for securing the equitable<br \/>\ndistribution of the essential commodity.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>15.\tThe amendments introduced, in our view, are regulatory<br \/>\nin nature and cannot be regarded as violative of freedom<br \/>\nguaranteed under Article 301 of the Constitution. In Jilubhai<br \/>\nNanbhjai Khachar &amp; Ors. v. State of Gujarat and Anr. (1995<br \/>\nSupp (1) SCC 596), after examining the principle of &#8220;Eminent<br \/>\nDomain&#8221; it was held by this Court that Article 300-A is not<br \/>\nattracted and deprivation is in exercise of police power and<br \/>\nsaid article enjoins that such deprivation should not be<br \/>\nwithout sanction of law.\n<\/p>\n<p>16.\tThere are similar provisions in the Excise Acts of other<br \/>\nStates, for example the Tamil Nadu Excise Act, 1971,<br \/>\nKarnataka Excise Act, 1965, Uttar Pradesh Excise Act, 1910<br \/>\nand the Andhra Pradesh Excise Act, 1968.  The provisions are<br \/>\nin Sections 4 and 14A of the Tamil Nadu Act, Sections 43A<br \/>\nand 43B of the Karnataka Act, Section 72 of the Uttar Pradesh<br \/>\nAct and Sections 46 and 46A of the Andhra Pradesh Excise<br \/>\nAct.\n<\/p>\n<p>17.\tReference may also be made to <a href=\"\/doc\/313870\/\">Deputy Commissioner,<br \/>\nDakshina Kannada District v. Rudolph Fernandes<\/a> [2000(3)<br \/>\nSCC 306] and <a href=\"\/doc\/1108225\/\">State of W.B. &amp; Ors. v. Sujit Kumar Rana<\/a> [2004<br \/>\n(4) SCC 129] while gauzing the validity of the impugned<br \/>\nprovisions.\n<\/p>\n<p>18.\tIn view of what has been stated above the inevitable<br \/>\nconclusion is that the appeals are without merit, deserve<br \/>\ndismissal, which we direct. No costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Oma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 21 April, 2008 Author: . A Pasayat Bench: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, P. Sathasivam CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 905 of 2002 PETITIONER: Oma Ram RESPONDENT: State of Rajasthan and Ors DATE OF JUDGMENT: 21\/04\/2008 BENCH: Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT &amp; P. SATHASIVAM JUDGMENT: J [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-230972","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Oma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 21 April, 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\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Oma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 21 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-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=\"2008-04-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-07-10T00:02:06+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=\"20 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Oma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 21 April, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-04-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-10T00:02:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008\"},\"wordCount\":4005,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008\",\"name\":\"Oma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 21 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-04-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-10T00:02:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Oma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 21 April, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Oma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 21 April, 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\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Oma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 21 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-04-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-07-10T00:02:06+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":"20 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Oma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 21 April, 2008","datePublished":"2008-04-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-10T00:02:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008"},"wordCount":4005,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008","name":"Oma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 21 April, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-04-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-10T00:02:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/oma-ram-vs-state-of-rajasthan-and-ors-on-21-april-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Oma Ram vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors on 21 April, 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:\/\/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\/230972","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=230972"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/230972\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=230972"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=230972"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=230972"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}