{"id":24572,"date":"1967-03-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1967-03-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967"},"modified":"2017-11-09T03:30:24","modified_gmt":"2017-11-08T22:00:24","slug":"yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967","title":{"rendered":"Yaduray Bansi vs Sunderbai on 28 March, 1967"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Yaduray Bansi vs Sunderbai on 28 March, 1967<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: (1969) GLR 45<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Shelat<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Shelat<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>Shelat, J.<\/p>\n<p> 1-5. *          *          *<\/p>\n<p>6. Even if, for a moment, we were to take it that she was ill-treated or beaten some time, before she went on the last occasion in March 1960, she can be taken to have duly condoned the same, and more so when she had gone to his place at Umred of her own accord. It Was urged that under Section 23(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, any act of cruelty committed by her husband would obviously be taken as condoned, and therefore, that ground of cruelty cannot be considered a good ground for claiming any such relief of judicial separation. The relevant part of Section 23 of the Act provides as under :&#8211;\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;(1) In any proceeding under this Act, whether defended or not, if the Court is satisfied that :&#8211;\n<\/p>\n<p>(a) &#8230;&#8230;.\n<\/p>\n<p>(b) where the ground of the petition is the ground specified in Clause (f) of Sub-section (1) of Section 10 or in Clause (i) of Sub-section (1) of Section 13, the petitioner has not in any manner been accessory to or connived at or condoned the<\/p>\n<p>act or acts complained of, or where the ground of the petitioner is cruelty the petitioner has not in any manner condoned the cruelty, and<\/p>\n<p>(c) &#8230;&#8230;.\n<\/p>\n<p>(d) &#8230;&#8230;.\n<\/p>\n<p>(e) &#8230;&#8230;.\n<\/p>\n<p>then, and in such a case, but not otherwise, the Court shall decree such relief accordingly.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>A plain reading of Clause   (b)   of Section 23(1) of the    Act, shows that before the  Court  is     satisfied for granting  any such relief, in case of a ground of cruelty &#8212; it must not have been condoned by the petitioner &#8212; before     filing   the petition. The present petition is based on a subsequent incident  which took  place on her third stay at Umred    in 1961 and that is not said to have been condoned. But the previous two incidents can easily be taken as her having condoned &#8212; if they were to be held as in any way established, and consequently   they  cannot   be   ordinarily taken into account.  But   it   was pointed out by Mr. Bhatt,    the learned advocate for the respondent,    by a reference to a case of Stones    v.  Stones, (1935) ILR 62 Cal 541,     where    it    was    held  that    a matrimonial    offence,    subsequent to the condonation     of     a    prior    matrimonial offence, operates     to    revive     the    condoned offence,     enabling     the   aggrieved party   to     rely    thereon    as    a    ground for divorce. That was a case  for divorce on the ground of adultery. Another case relied  upon by him  is one of Kafton v. Kafton, (1948) 1 All ER 435, where it was held that &#8220;cruelty which   has been condoned may be revived    as a matrimonial offence  by subsequent desertion,  and   for this  purpose  desertion  for  3  years   need not   be   established.&#8221; This   case  was further relied upon  by   Mr.  Bhatt to show that the requirement by the Court of corroboration   where      cruelty  is  alleged   is merely a  matter   of practice,   and   not  a rule of law, and it has never been decided that the Court is not entitled in a proper case, where (there?) it is no doubt where the     truth     lies,    to    act    on    the    uncorroborated     testimony    of     the     petitioner.     Leaving    aside    for    the    time being    as     to    the        requirement        of any corroboration to the petitioner&#8217;s evidence, it can be said that even if any act of cruelty has been condoned by the wife, that could be revived as a ground if she is later  on treated    with  cruelty and\/or deserted. But that has to be so only for showing that he was so behaving before, and that he has    continued to be of the same type, provided the petitioner is able to establish by reliable and sufficient evidence the acts of cruelty on the part of her husband which obliged her to leave the place and then file   the petition for judicial separation.     In  other words,   in order to strengthen   or add justification to her being obliged to live separate from her husband on grounds of cruelty and desertion, previous instances of similar character may well be relevant but it cannot serve as good ground for obtaining judicial separation unless sufficient and reliable evidence with regard to the last acts of ill-treatment and cruelty or\/ and desertion which led her to file the petition, are established in the case. In the first case, I am not satisfied with her evidence alone in that direction and even if any such acts were committed, they stood condoned by her as soon as she went to her husband&#8217;s house of her own accord on the last occasion.\n<\/p>\n<p>7. It is, therefore, necessary for her to establish the matrimonial offence such as that of cruelty on the part of her husband so as to cause reasonable apprehension in her mind that it is harmful and injurious to live with her husband. The onus of proof of any such matrimonial offence is on the person who alleges the same namely the petitioner in the present case. The parties to such a petition are obviously interested in the relief that one claims against the other and each side is likely, therefore, to either exaggerate or even go beyond what might have actually happened, for ordinarily solemn marriage ties cannot easily be disrupted unless, it has become highly unbearable for one to stay with the other. In a case of this character, therefore, while rule of law may not require corroboration in the sense that even the testimony of a single person such as even the party in a proceeding can be acted upon if it inspires confidence and the reliability that it should, but as pointed out from the decision in the case of (1948) 1 All ER 435, as a matter of practice Court would ordinarily require some corroboration. In fact, if we refer to the judgment of Tucker L.J., it has been pointed out that there may be many cases in which it would be unsafe to act upon without corroboration, though no doubt the Court would be entitled to act upon without corroboration in a proper case, where there is no doubt where the truth lies. Then it is observed as under :&#8211;\n<\/p>\n<p>  &#8220;I do not desire to be understood as saying anything to weaken the requirement that corroboration in these cases is highly desirable, but there may be cases in which the Court feels that it can safely act without corroboration.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>It is no doubt true that in cases of this character where cruelty is committed inside the doors of the house, eye witnesses may not be possible to have. In Carroll v. Carroll, AIR 1934 Pat 475, it is observed that &#8220;in a case of cruelty it is necessary to have corroboration of the evidence of petitioner.&#8221; In another case of Mirjanali v. Maimuna Bibi, AIR 1949 Assam 14, it is observed that &#8220;it is<br \/>\nwell-established principle that in matrimonial causes, the uncorroborated testimony of one of the parties to the marriage is not sufficient to prove cruelty. There must be some corroboration of that evidence, though obviously it is not necessary to examine an eye-witness to the alleged acts of cruelty&#8221;. On the other hand it was pointed out that in case of Mt. Anis Begum v. Muhammed Istafa Wali Khan. AIR 1933 All 634, at p. 640, it has been observed that &#8220;when the question is of the husband&#8217;s cruel treatment towards his wife, evidence of a large number of witnesses cannot be expected to be forthcoming, and much will depend on the statement of the wife corroborated by the circumstantial evidence, particularly when the cruelty is alleged to have taken place inside the house of her husband.&#8221; The effect of all these decisions is that ordinarily as a rule of prudence and practice, though not as a rule of law, in cases of matrimonial causes the Court should always expect to get some corroboration from other evidence or even from circumstances in regard to the material particulars relating to the acts of cruelty alleged by one against the other. It is only in very rare cases where and that too when the evidence of the party to such a cause inspires the confidence and the reliability, in the given circumstances of a particular case, that the Court can act upon the same without any corroboration. While no direct evidence to support a party may be had, there must be some reliable circumstances which tend to support the testimony of a petitioner and it is in that light that we have to consider the effect of the evidence led in the case. In the present case, however, it is difficult to put implicit reliance on the evidence either of the petitioner or the opponent. Each side has not chosen to tell the truth, and while one has tried to exaggerate to the highest extent, the other has tried to minimise his attitude and acts with regard to the relations existing between them. Apart from that position, this is a case in which some corroboration appears to be available with regard to the acts of cruelty alleged against the husband and yet none is brought on record.\n<\/p>\n<pre>8-11. * *          *          *          * \n\n \n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Yaduray Bansi vs Sunderbai on 28 March, 1967 Equivalent citations: (1969) GLR 45 Author: Shelat Bench: Shelat JUDGMENT Shelat, J. 1-5. * * * 6. Even if, for a moment, we were to take it that she was ill-treated or beaten some time, before she went on the last occasion in March [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-24572","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Yaduray Bansi vs Sunderbai on 28 March, 1967 - 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\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Yaduray Bansi vs Sunderbai on 28 March, 1967 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967\" \/>\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=\"1967-03-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-11-08T22:00:24+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\\\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Yaduray Bansi vs Sunderbai on 28 March, 1967\",\"datePublished\":\"1967-03-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-08T22:00:24+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967\"},\"wordCount\":1527,\"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\\\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967\",\"name\":\"Yaduray Bansi vs Sunderbai on 28 March, 1967 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1967-03-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-08T22:00:24+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Yaduray Bansi vs Sunderbai on 28 March, 1967\"}]},{\"@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":"Yaduray Bansi vs Sunderbai on 28 March, 1967 - 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\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Yaduray Bansi vs Sunderbai on 28 March, 1967 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1967-03-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-11-08T22:00:24+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\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Yaduray Bansi vs Sunderbai on 28 March, 1967","datePublished":"1967-03-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-08T22:00:24+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967"},"wordCount":1527,"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\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967","name":"Yaduray Bansi vs Sunderbai on 28 March, 1967 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1967-03-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-08T22:00:24+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/yaduray-bansi-vs-sunderbai-on-28-march-1967#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Yaduray Bansi vs Sunderbai on 28 March, 1967"}]},{"@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\/24572","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=24572"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24572\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24572"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24572"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24572"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}