{"id":238252,"date":"2009-05-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-05-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009"},"modified":"2018-09-04T08:11:28","modified_gmt":"2018-09-04T02:41:28","slug":"subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009","title":{"rendered":"Subhash Soni & Anr vs State Of M.P on 6 May, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Subhash Soni & Anr vs State Of M.P on 6 May, 2009<\/div>\n
Author: D A Pasayat<\/div>\n
Bench: Arijit Pasayat, Asok Kumar Ganguly<\/div>\n
                                                                        REPORTABLE\n\n                  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA\n\n                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION\n\n                  CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 639 OF 2008\n\n\n\nSubhash Soni & Anr.                                        ....Appellants\n\n                                    Versus\n\n\nState of M.P.                                              ....Respondent\n\n\n\n\n                                 JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
1.    Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the<\/p>\n
Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench, upholding conviction of the<\/p>\n
appellant for offence punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 34<\/p>\n
the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the `IPC’).\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
2.    Prosecution version, in a nutshell, is as follows:
\n      On 20.9.1995 Anil (hereinafter referred to as the `deceased’) left his<\/p>\n
house for some work and told his brother Rajendra (PW.1) that he will be<\/p>\n
returning within 10 minutes. He left the house at 8.30 p.m. Just after 15<\/p>\n
minutes of his departure, somebody informed Rajendra (PW.1) that deceased<\/p>\n
was assaulted with a sword. Having heard the news, Rajendra immediately<\/p>\n
rushed in the direction where the deceased had gone on his motor cycle. He<\/p>\n
saw a crowd of people in front of Laxmi Market surrounding the deceased<\/p>\n
who having suffered many injuries on his person was lying on the road. At<\/p>\n
the same time Dr. Komal Chandra Kothari (PW.4) reached near the crowd<\/p>\n
and on request deceased was taken to Civil Hospital in his car. On the way<\/p>\n
to the Hospital deceased was questioned by Rajendra (PW.1) as to who had<\/p>\n
assaulted him, deceased replied that accused Ramesh, Subhash and Heeralal<\/p>\n
had assaulted him by sword. Deceased was admitted in the hospital where he<\/p>\n
succumbed to the injuries during treatment. The FIR (Ex. P.l) was recorded<\/p>\n
in the night at 9.40 p.m. Police recorded the statements of two eye witnesses<\/p>\n
Radhesyam (PW.2) and Prakash Jadhav (PW.3) on 9.10.1995 along with<\/p>\n
other eye witnesses Manohar @ Babu, Balraj, Premsingh and Satish<\/p>\n
Shrivastave on 21.9.1995. On 22.09.1995 statements of witnesses Nankdas,<\/p>\n
Ghanshyam, Parmanand, Govindram and Jaikishore were also recorded by<\/p>\n
Investigating Officer R.S. Chundavat (PW.8). Postmortem was performed<\/p>\n
                                     2<\/span>
\nby Dr. D.K. Rathore (PW.7). Report is Ex.10. Police also seized the true<\/p>\n
copy of the documents (Ex. P.2-C) regarding civil litigation pending<\/p>\n
between deceased Anil Soni, his brother Rajendra Soni (PW. l) and appellant<\/p>\n
Heeralal. Crime No. 715\/ 1995 was registered by the police and after<\/p>\n
necessary investigation, the charge sheet was filed against the accused<\/p>\n
persons for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 read with<\/p>\n
34 of the IPC and under Section 4 read with Section 25 (1-B), and 27 of<\/p>\n
Arms Act, 1959 (in short the `Arms Act’).\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      The appellants abjured their guilt and their defence was of false<\/p>\n
implication, therefore, they were put on trial. They stated in their statements<\/p>\n
recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in<\/p>\n
short `Cr. P.C.’) that deceased and his brother Rajendra (PW.1) were doing<\/p>\n
colonizing business and on their behalf Radheshyam (PW.2) and Parkash<\/p>\n
(PW.3) used to collect money from the concerned persons. About three years<\/p>\n
ago one Babulal was got murdered by the deceased and Rajendra (PW.1).<\/p>\n
Dr. Komal Chandra Kothari (PW.4) was having family terms with deceased<\/p>\n
and his brother Rajendra (PW.1). They also submitted that Prakash Jadhav<\/p>\n
(PW.3) was convicted for murder of one Prabhakar Kadam and sentenced to<\/p>\n
life imprisonment by the learned Sessions Court of Dewas. In the said case,<\/p>\n
                                      3<\/span>
\nappellant Ramesh appeared as a witness against Parkash Jadhav. Because of<\/p>\n
all these reasons, appellants pleaded their false implication. Appellants<\/p>\n
examined Balraj Tiwari (DW. 1) in their defence whereas prosecution<\/p>\n
examined eight witnesses and proved 17 documents to prove its case.<\/p>\n
      The trial Court while acquitting Ramesh under Sections 4 read with<\/p>\n
25(1-B), (b) and 27 of the Arms Act convicted the three appellants under<\/p>\n
Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The trial Court mainly relied on the<\/p>\n
evidence of PWs. 2 and 3 who were eye witnesses and the dying<\/p>\n
declarations.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
      In appeal, the primary stand was the evidence of PWs. 2 and 3 should<\/p>\n
not have been relied upon by the trial Court because of their conduct in not<\/p>\n
informing the police being eye witnesses of the incident and keeping mum.<\/p>\n
It was also submitted that the FIR Ex. P1 was ante time. The High Court<\/p>\n
held that the core question was whether the evidence of PWs.2 and 3 is<\/p>\n
credible and whether it was in line with the evidence of Rajendra Soni (PW-<\/p>\n
1) and doctor (PW-4) on the point of oral dying declaration. The High Court<\/p>\n
held that the eye witnesses version should not have been relied upon because<\/p>\n
of highly unnatural conduct of the accused and unexplained silence for long<\/p>\n
                                     4<\/span>
\n19 days. However, the High Court found that the evidence relating to dying<\/p>\n
declaration was reliable. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed in part as the<\/p>\n
conviction of Hiralal was set aside. However, the appeal was dismissed qua<\/p>\n
accused Ramesh.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
3.    In support of the appeal learned counsel for the appellant submitted<\/p>\n
that after having discarded the version of the so-called eye witnesses, the<\/p>\n
High Court should not have placed reliance on the so-called dying<\/p>\n
declaration.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
4.    Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, supported the<\/p>\n
judgment.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
5.    Though a dying declaration is entitled to great weight, it is worthwhile<\/p>\n
to note that the accused has no power of cross-examination. Such a power is<\/p>\n
essential for eliciting the truth as an obligation of oath could be. This is the<\/p>\n
reason the court also insists that the dying declaration should be of such a<\/p>\n
nature as to inspire full confidence of the court in its correctness. The court<\/p>\n
has to be on guard that the statement of the deceased was not as a result of<\/p>\n
either tutoring, or prompting or a product of imagination. The court must be<\/p>\n
                                       5<\/span>
\nfurther satisfied that the deceased was in a fit state of mind after a clear<\/p>\n
opportunity to observe and identify the assailant. Once the court is satisfied<\/p>\n
that the declaration was true and voluntary, undoubtedly, it can base its<\/p>\n
conviction on the same without any further corroboration. It cannot be laid<\/p>\n
down as an absolute rule of law that the dying declaration cannot form the<\/p>\n
sole basis of conviction unless it is corroborated. The rule requiring<\/p>\n
corroboration is merely a rule of prudence. This Court has laid down in<\/p>\n
several judgments the principles governing dying declaration, which could<\/p>\n
be summed up as under as indicated in Paniben v. State of Gujarat<\/a> (1992(2)<\/p>\n
SCC 474) (SCC pp.480-81, paras 18-19)<\/p>\n
         (i) There is neither rule of law nor of prudence that dying<\/p>\n
      declaration cannot be acted upon without corroboration. [See: Munnu<\/p>\n
      Raja v. State of M.P.(1976 (3) SCC 104)]<\/p>\n
         (ii) If the court is satisfied that the dying declaration is true and<\/p>\n
      voluntary it can base conviction on it, without corroboration. (See:<\/p>\n
      State of U.P. v. Ram Sagar Yadav<\/a> (1985(1) SCC 552) and Ramawati<\/p>\n
      Devi v. State of Bihar<\/a> 1983(1) SCC 211))<\/p>\n
         (iii) The court has to scrutinise the dying declaration carefully and<\/p>\n
      must ensure that the declaration is not the result of tutoring, prompting<\/p>\n
      or imagination. The deceased had an opportunity to observe and<\/p>\n
                                      6<\/span>
\nidentify the assailants and was in a fit state to make the declaration.<\/p>\n
[See: K. Ramachandra Reddy v. Public Prosecutor<\/a>(1976(3) SCC<\/p>\n
618)])<\/p>\n
   (iv) Where a dying declaration is suspicious, it should not be acted<\/p>\n
upon without corroborative evidence. [See: Rasheed Beg v. State of<\/p>\n
M.P.(1974(4) SCC 264)]<\/p>\n
   (v) Where the deceased was unconscious and could never make<\/p>\n
any dying declaration the evidence with regard to it is to be rejected.<\/p>\n
[See: Kake Singh v. State of M.P.(1981 Supp. SCC 25)]<\/p>\n
   (vi) A dying declaration which suffers from infirmity cannot form<\/p>\n
the basis of conviction. [See: Ram Manorath v. State of<\/p>\n
U.P.<\/a>(1981(2)SCC 654]<\/p>\n
   (vii) Merely because a dying declaration does not contain the<\/p>\n
details as to the occurrence, it is not to be rejected. (See State of<\/p>\n
Maharashtra v. Krishnamurti Laxmipati Naidu<\/a> [1980 Supp. SCC<\/p>\n
455)]<\/p>\n
   (viii) Equally, merely because it is a brief statement, it is not to be<\/p>\n
discarded. On the contrary, the shortness of the statement itself<\/p>\n
guarantees truth. [See: Surajdeo Ojha v. State of Bihar<\/a> (1980<\/p>\n
Supp.SCC 769)]<\/p>\n
                                7<\/span>\n<\/p>\n
         (ix) Normally, the court in order to satisfy whether the deceased<\/p>\n
      was in a fit mental condition to make the dying declaration looks up to<\/p>\n
      the medical opinion. But where the eyewitness said that the deceased<\/p>\n
      was in a fit and conscious state to make the dying declaration, the<\/p>\n
      medical opinion cannot prevail. [See: Nanhau Ram v. State of<\/p>\n
      M.P.(1988 Supp. SCC 152)]<\/p>\n
         (x) Where the prosecution version differs from the version as given<\/p>\n
      in the dying declaration, the said declaration cannot be acted upon.<\/p>\n
      [See: State of U.P. v. Madan Mohan<\/a> (1989 (3) SCC 390)]<\/p>\n
         (xi) Where there are more than one statements in the nature of<\/p>\n
      dying declaration, the one first in point of time must be preferred. Of<\/p>\n
      course, if the plurality of the dying declaration could be held to be<\/p>\n
      trustworthy and reliable, it has to be accepted. [See: Mohanlal<\/p>\n
      Gangaram Gehani v. State of Maharashtra (1982 (1) SCC 700)]<\/p>\n
6.    In the instant case opinion of Dr. Srivastava was given after admission<\/p>\n
of deceased in the intensive care ward during course of treatment. On the<\/p>\n
basis of this it cannot be said that while taking him to the hospital Rajendra<\/p>\n
Son (PW1) and Komalchandra Kothari (PW.4) could not have spoken to him<\/p>\n
or that the deceased was in an unconscious condition. Place of injuries were<\/p>\n
                                      8<\/span>
\nthigh and leg.        Therefore, loss of unconscious can be progressive.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the conclusions of the trial Court and the High Court that the<\/p>\n
deceased was not unconscious and was in a position to give name of the<\/p>\n
assailants while he was being taken to the hospital cannot be faulted. In the<\/p>\n
instant case it has to be noted that one dying declaration was made before<\/p>\n
the Doctor Kothari (PW.4), an independent witness who had no reason to<\/p>\n
falsely implicate the accused persons. Doctor (PW4) has categorically stated<\/p>\n
that he was driving the car himself when he heard the deceased telling PW1,<\/p>\n
the names of the assailants. Doctor (PW4) has also stated that there was loss<\/p>\n
of consciousness for a few minutes whereafter the deceased regained<\/p>\n
consciousness.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
7.       That being so there is no infirmity in the conclusions of the High<\/p>\n
Court.\n<\/p>\n
8.       There is no merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed.<\/p>\n
                                        ………………………………J
\n                                  (Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT)<\/p>\n
                                  …………………………………J.\n<\/p>\n
                                  (ASOK KUMAR GANGULY)
\nNew Delhi,
\nMay 06, 2009<\/p>\n
                                         9<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Subhash Soni & Anr vs State Of M.P on 6 May, 2009 Author: D A Pasayat Bench: Arijit Pasayat, Asok Kumar Ganguly REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 639 OF 2008 Subhash Soni & Anr. ….Appellants Versus State of M.P. ….Respondent JUDGMENT DR. ARIJIT […]<\/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-238252","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nSubhash Soni & Anr vs State Of M.P on 6 May, 2009 - 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\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Subhash Soni & Anr vs State Of M.P on 6 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-05-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-04T02:41:28+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Subhash Soni & Anr vs State Of M.P on 6 May, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-04T02:41:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1683,\"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\\\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009\",\"name\":\"Subhash Soni & Anr vs State Of M.P on 6 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-04T02:41:28+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Subhash Soni & Anr vs State Of M.P on 6 May, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Subhash Soni & Anr vs State Of M.P on 6 May, 2009 - 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\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Subhash Soni & Anr vs State Of M.P on 6 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-05-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-04T02:41:28+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Subhash Soni & Anr vs State Of M.P on 6 May, 2009","datePublished":"2009-05-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-04T02:41:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009"},"wordCount":1683,"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\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009","name":"Subhash Soni & Anr vs State Of M.P on 6 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-05-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-04T02:41:28+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/subhash-soni-anr-vs-state-of-m-p-on-6-may-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Subhash Soni & Anr vs State Of M.P on 6 May, 2009"}]},{"@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\/238252","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=238252"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/238252\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=238252"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=238252"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=238252"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}