{"id":236270,"date":"2010-12-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-12-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010"},"modified":"2016-10-23T21:04:10","modified_gmt":"2016-10-23T15:34:10","slug":"the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010","title":{"rendered":"The vs The Present Appeal on 20 December, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
The vs The Present Appeal on 20 December, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/677\/2003\t 6\/ 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. 677 of 2003\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \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\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \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\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\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\nTHE\nSTATE OF GUJARAT - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nMAGANBHAI\nRAMJIBHAI PATEL & 5 - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nHH PARIKH Ld. APP for Appellant(s) : 1, \nMR PM DAVE for Opponent(s)\n: 1, \nMR ASIT B JOSHI for Opponent(s) : 1, \nMR UTPAL M PANCHAL\nfor Opponent(s) : 2, 5, \nUNSERVED-EXPIRED (N) for Opponent(s) :\n3, \nMR NL PATEL for Opponent(s) : 4, 6, \nMR KAUSHAL D PANDYA for\nOpponent(s) : 4,\n6, \n=========================================================\n\n\n \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 Z.K.SAIYED\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 01\/12\/2010 \n\n \n\n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n
1.0
\nThe present appeal, under section 378 of the Code of Criminal
\nProcedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment and order of
\nacquittal dated 24.2.2003 passed by the learned JMFC, Surat, in
\nCriminal Case No.2153\/1994, whereby the accused have been acquitted
\nof the charges under sec. 120-B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC,
\nleveled against them.\n<\/p>\n
2.0
\nThe brief facts of the prosecution case are as under:\n<\/p>\n
2.1
\nThat during 2.7.1975 to 2.8.1984, accused no. 3 had without following
\nany due procedure, in collusion with accused no.1, 4, 5 converted his
\nagricultural land bearing survey no. 51\/1-2 of village Vesu and the
\naccused no. 3 has made revenue entry in village form No. 6 vide entry
\nno. 719 on 27.10.1983 after a period of seven years, and the said
\nentry has been certified by accused no. 6 on 5.12.1983 without
\nverifying the record.\n<\/p>\n
2.2
\nTherefore, a complaint with respect to the aforesaid offence was
\nfiled against the respondents. Thereafter, necessary investigation
\nwas carried out and statements of several witnesses were recorded.
\nDuring the course of investigation, respondents were arrested and,
\nultimately, charge-sheet was filed against them before the court of
\nlearned JMFC, Surat,  which was numbered as Criminal Case No.
\n2153\/1994. The trial was initiated against the respondents.\n<\/p>\n
2.3
\nTo prove the case against the present accused, the prosecution has
\nexamined witnesses and also produced documentary evidence.\n<\/p>\n
2.4
\nAt the end of trial, after recording the statement of the accused
\nunder section 313 of Cr.P.C., and hearing arguments on behalf of
\nprosecution and the defence, the learned trial Judge acquitted the
\nrespondent of all the charges leveled against them by judgment and
\norder dated 24.2.2003.\n<\/p>\n
2.5
\nBeing aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and
\norder passed by the trial Court the appellant State has preferred the
\npresent appeal.\n<\/p>\n
3.0
\nIt was contended by learned APP that the judgment and order of the
\ntrial Court is against the provisions of law; the trial Court has not
\nproperly considered the evidence led by the prosecution and looking
\nto the provisions of law itself it is established that the
\nprosecution has proved the whole ingredients of the evidence against
\nthe present respondent. Learned APP has also taken this court through
\nthe oral as well as the entire documentary evidence.\n<\/p>\n
4.0
\nAt the outset it is required to be noted that the principles which
\nwould govern and regulate the hearing of appeal by this Court against
\nan order of acquittal passed by the trial Court have been very
\nsuccinctly explained by the Apex Court in a catena of decisions. In
\nthe case of
\nM.S. Narayana Menon @ Mani Vs. State of Kerala & Anr, reported in
\n(2006)6 SCC, 39,
\nthe Apex Court has narrated about the powers of the High Court in
\nappeal against the order of acquittal. In para 54 of the decision,
\nthe Apex Court has observed as under:\n<\/p>\n
 54.
\nIn any event the High Court entertained an appeal treating to be an
\nappeal against acquittal, it was in fact exercising the revisional
\njurisdiction. Even while exercising an appellate power against a
\njudgment of acquittal, the High Court should have borne in mind the
\nwell-settled principles of law that where two view are possible, the
\nappellate
\ncourt should not interfere with the finding of acquittal recorded by
\nthe court below.\n<\/p>\n
4.1
\nFurther, in the case of Chandrappa
\nVs. State of Karnataka, reported in (2007)4 SCC 415
\nthe
\nApex Court laid down the following principles:\n<\/p>\n
 42.
\nFrom the above decisions, in our considered view, the following
\ngeneral principles regarding powers of the appellate court while
\ndealing
\nwith an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge:\n<\/p>\n
[1]
\nAn appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and
\nreconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.\n<\/p>\n
[2]
\nThe Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction
\nor condition on exercise of such power and an appellate court on the
\nevidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of
\nfact and of law.\n<\/p>\n
[3]
\nVarious expressions, such as,  substantial and compelling reasons ,
\n good and sufficient grounds ,  very strong circumstances ,
\n distorted conclusions ,  glaring mistakes , etc. are not
\nintended to curtain extensive powers of an appellate court in an
\nappeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature
\nof  flourishes of language  to emphasis the reluctance of an
\nappellate court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power
\nof the court to review the evidence and to come to its own
\nconclusion.\n<\/p>\n
[4]
\nAn appellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of
\nacquittal there is double presumption in favour of the accused.
\nFirstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the
\nfundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person
\nshall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a
\ncompetent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his
\nacquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced,
\nreaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court.\n<\/p>\n
[5]
\nIf two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the
\nevidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the
\nfinding of acquittal recorded by the trial court.\n<\/p>\n
4.2
\nThus, it is a settled principle that while exercising appellate
\npower, even if two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis
\nof the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the
\nfinding of acquittal recorded by the trial court.\n<\/p>\n
4.3
\nEven in a recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of State
\nof Goa V. Sanjay Thakran & Anr. Reported in (2007)3 SCC 75,
\nthe Court has reiterated the powers of the High Court in such cases.
\nIn para 16 of the said decision the Court has observed as under:\n<\/p>\n
 16.
\nFrom the aforesaid decisions, it is apparent that while exercising
\nthe powers in appeal against the order of acquittal the Court of
\nappeal would not ordinarily interfere with the order of acquittal
\nunless the approach of the lower Court is vitiated by some manifest
\nillegality and the conclusion arrived at would not be arrived at by
\nany reasonable person and, therefore, the decision is to be
\ncharacterized as perverse. Merely because two views are possible, the
\nCourt of appeal would not take the view which would upset the
\njudgment delivered by the Court below. However, the appellate court
\nhas a power to review the evidence if it is of the view that the
\nconclusion arrived at by the Court below is perverse and the Court
\nhas committed a manifest error of law and ignored the material
\nevidence on record. A duty is cast upon the appellate court, in such
\ncircumstances, to re-appreciate the evidence to arrive to a just
\ndecision on the basis of material placed on record to find out
\nwhether any of the accused is connected with the commission of the
\ncrime he is charged with.\n<\/p>\n
4.4
\nSimilar principle has been laid down by the Apex Court in the cases
\nof State
\nof
\nUttar Pradesh Vs. Ram Veer Singh & Ors, reported in 2007 AIR SCW
\n5553 and
\nin Girja
\nPrasad (Dead) by LRs Vs. state of MP, reported in 2007 AIR SCW 5589.
\nThus, the powers which this Court may exercise against an order of
\nacquittal are well settled.\n<\/p>\n
4.5
\nIt is also a settled legal position that in acquittal appeal, the
\nappellate court is not
\nrequired to re-write the judgment or to give fresh reasonings, when
\nthe reasons assigned by the Court below are found to be just and
\nproper. Such principle
\nis laid down by the Apex Court in the case of State
\nof Karnataka Vs. Hemareddy, reported in AIR 1981 SC 1417,
\nwherein,
\nit is held as under:\n<\/p>\n
 &
\nThis court
\nhas observed in Girija
\nNandini Devi V. Bigendra Nandini Chaudhary (1967)1 SCR 93: (AIR 1967
\nSC 1124) that
\nit is not the duty of the appellate court when it agrees with the
\nview of the trial court on the evidence to repeat the narration of
\nthe evidence or to reiterate the reasons given by the trial court
\nexpression of general agreement with the reasons given by the Court
\nthe decision of which is under appeal, will ordinarily suffice.\n<\/p>\n
4.6
\nThus, in case the appellate court agrees with the reasons and the
\nopinion given by the lower court, then the discussion of evidence is
\nnot necessary.\n<\/p>\n
5.0
\nI have gone through the judgment and order passed by the trial court.
\nI have also perused the oral as well as documentary evidence led by
\nthe trial court and also considered the submissions made by learned
\nAPP for the appellant-State. The trial court while considering the
\noral as well as documentary evidence has clearly observed that the
\nprosecution has miserably failed to prove the case against the
\naccused beyond any reasonable doubt. Even no direct or indirect
\nevidence is produced by the prosecution to prove the criminal
\nconspiracy. So far as the forged document is concerned, the
\nprosecution has also failed to prove the same to the effect that who
\nhas prepared the said forged document.   Even in the present appeal,
\nnothing is produced or pointed out to rebut the conclusion of the
\ntrial Court.  Thus, from the evidence itself it is established that
\nthe prosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.\n<\/p>\n
6.0
\nMr. HH Parikh learned APP is not in a position to show any evidence
\nto take a contrary view of the matter or that the approach of the
\ntrial court is vitiated by some manifest illegality or that the
\ndecision is perverse or that the trial court has ignored the material
\nevidence on record.\n<\/p>\n
6.0
\nIn the above view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that
\nthe trial court was completely justified in acquitting the respondent
\nof the charges leveled against him.\n<\/p>\n
7.0
\nI find that the findings recorded by the trial court are absolutely
\njust and proper and in recording the said findings, no illegality or
\ninfirmity has been committed by it.\n<\/p>\n
8.0
\nI am, therefore, in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate
\nconclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the court
\nbelow and hence find no reasons to interfere with the same. Hence the
\nappeal is hereby dismissed. R & P to be sent back to the trial
\nCourt, forthwith. Bail bond, if any, stands cancelled.\n<\/p>\n
(Z.K.\n<\/p>\n
SAIYED, J.)<\/p>\n
mandora\/<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court The vs The Present Appeal on 20 December, 2010 Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/677\/2003 6\/ 8 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 677 of 2003 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be […]<\/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-236270","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe vs The Present Appeal on 20 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The vs The Present Appeal on 20 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-12-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-23T15:34:10+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The vs The Present Appeal on 20 December, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-23T15:34:10+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1678,\"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\\\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010\",\"name\":\"The vs The Present Appeal on 20 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-12-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-23T15:34:10+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The vs The Present Appeal on 20 December, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The vs The Present Appeal on 20 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The vs The Present Appeal on 20 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-12-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-23T15:34:10+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The vs The Present Appeal on 20 December, 2010","datePublished":"2010-12-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-23T15:34:10+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010"},"wordCount":1678,"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\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010","name":"The vs The Present Appeal on 20 December, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-12-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-23T15:34:10+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-vs-the-present-appeal-on-20-december-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The vs The Present Appeal on 20 December, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/236270","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=236270"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/236270\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=236270"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=236270"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=236270"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}