{"id":255737,"date":"2010-05-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-05-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010"},"modified":"2015-12-23T11:31:27","modified_gmt":"2015-12-23T06:01:27","slug":"bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010","title":{"rendered":"Bhartiben vs Commissioner on 11 May, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Bhartiben vs Commissioner on 11 May, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Abhilasha Kumari,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/3894\/2010\t 1\/ 6\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 3894 of 2010\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHON'BLE\nSMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n=========================================================\n\n \n\nBHARTIBEN\nW\/O GANESHBHAI CHUNARA - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nCOMMISSIONER\nOF POLICE &amp; 2 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nHEMANT B RAVAL for\nPetitioner(s) : 1, \nRULE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2. \nMS\nJIRGA ZAVERI ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 2 -\n3. \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHON'BLE\n\t\t\tSMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 11\/05\/2010 \n\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">1.\t\tThis<br \/>\npetition has been filed under Articles 226 read with Articles 21 and<br \/>\n22(5) of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to quash and set<br \/>\naside order of detention dated 16.12.2009<br \/>\npassed by the<br \/>\nCommissioner<br \/>\nof Police, Ahmedabad, in<br \/>\nexercise of powers under the provisions of the Gujarat Prevention of<br \/>\nAnti-Social Activities Act, 1985 ( the Act  for short).\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">2.\t\tThe<br \/>\ndetenu has been branded as a &#8216;bootlegger&#8217;, within the meaning of<br \/>\nSection 2(b) of the Act, as she has been found to be involved in<br \/>\noffences under the Bombay Prohibition Act.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">3.\t\tWhile<br \/>\npassing the order of detention, which was executed on the same day,<br \/>\nthe detaining authority has taken into consideration that four<br \/>\noffences under the Bombay Prohibition Act have<br \/>\nbeen registered against the detenu and that the<br \/>\nactivities carried on by her are detrimental to the maintenance of<br \/>\npublic order, and prejudicial to public health.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">4.\t\tI<br \/>\nhave heard Mr.<br \/>\nHemant B. Raval, learned counsel for the petitioner,<br \/>\nMs.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">Jirga Zaveri, learned Assistant Government Pleader, and<br \/>\nperused the averments made in the petition and documents on record.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">5.\t\tIt<br \/>\nis submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that merely by<br \/>\nregistration of offences<br \/>\nunder the Bombay Prohibition Act, it cannot be said<br \/>\nthat  public order  has been disturbed by the detenu. Moreover,<br \/>\nno statements of witnesses to substantiate these allegations have<br \/>\nbeen recorded by the detaining authority                             <\/p>\n<p>                                                      so as to arrive<br \/>\nat a subjective satisfaction that the activities of the detenu are<br \/>\ndetrimental to public order and prejudicial to public health,<br \/>\ntherefore, the petition may be allowed.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">6.\t\tThe<br \/>\nlearned Assistant Government Pleader has supported the order of<br \/>\ndetention and prayed for dismissal of the petition.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">7.\t\tHaving<br \/>\nheard the learned counsel for the respective parties and having<br \/>\nperused the averments made in the petition as well as the contents of<br \/>\nthe impugned order, and other documents on record, in the considered<br \/>\nview of this Court, in order to arrive at a subjective satisfaction<br \/>\nthat the activities alleged to be carried on by the detenu, namely<br \/>\n`bootlegging&#8217;, are prejudicial to the maintenance of public order and<br \/>\nprejudicial to public health, the detaining authority must rely upon<br \/>\ncogent and credible evidence, and material on record. It must be<br \/>\ntaken into consideration by the detaining authority that the<br \/>\nactivities of the detenu, either directly or indirectly, are likely<br \/>\nto cause harm, danger or alarm, or feeling of insecurity among the<br \/>\ngeneral public or a grave danger to life, property or public health.<br \/>\nWhile undertaking this exercise, the detaining authority must draw a<br \/>\nclear line between cases falling within the category of breach of law<br \/>\nand order, and breach of  public order. In the present case, the said<br \/>\nexercise does not seem to have been done by the detaining authority,<br \/>\nas there is nothing on record to suggest that the activities of the<br \/>\ndetenu have given rise to a feeling of alarm in the public or posed a<br \/>\ngrave danger to public order or public health. It cannot be said that<br \/>\nmerely by registration of  offences<br \/>\nunder the Bombay Prohibition Act, the activities of the<br \/>\ndetenu are causing insecurity, and fear among the general public or<br \/>\nare detrimental to public health or maintenance of public order.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">8.\t\tThe<br \/>\nSupreme Court, in  <a href=\"\/doc\/1753534\/\" id=\"a_1\">Darpan<br \/>\n@ Dharban Kumar Sharma v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors<\/a>.  (2003)2<br \/>\nSCC 313 has laid down that there should be material on record to show<br \/>\nthat the incidence and activities of the detenu are so grave as to<br \/>\ndisturb the even tempo of life of the community in the locality, or<br \/>\ndisturb the general peace and tranquility, or create a sense of alarm<br \/>\nand insecurity in the locality.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">9.\t\tHaving perused the<br \/>\ncontents of the impugned order of detention and the documents annexed<br \/>\nto the petition, there is no material on record to indicate that the<br \/>\nactivities of the detenu fall in this category. The registration of<br \/>\nprohibition cases by itself cannot be considered to be a breach of<br \/>\npublic order, and nor is there any material on record to show that<br \/>\nthe same has adversely affected the maintenance of public order.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">10.\t\tIn view of the<br \/>\nabove, the petition is allowed. The impugned order of detention dated<br \/>\n16.12.2009 passed by the Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad, is<br \/>\nquashed and set aside. The detenu is ordered to be set at liberty<br \/>\nforthwith, if not required in any other case. Rule is made absolute<br \/>\naccordingly. Direct Service is permitted.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">(SMT.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_12\">ABHILASHA KUMARI, J.)<\/p>\n<p>Umesh\/<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Bhartiben vs Commissioner on 11 May, 2010 Author: Abhilasha Kumari,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/3894\/2010 1\/ 6 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3894 of 2010 For Approval and Signature: HON&#8217;BLE SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-255737","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 v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Bhartiben vs Commissioner on 11 May, 2010 - 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\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bhartiben vs Commissioner on 11 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-05-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-12-23T06:01:27+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=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bhartiben vs Commissioner on 11 May, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-05-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-23T06:01:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010\"},\"wordCount\":747,\"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\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010\",\"name\":\"Bhartiben vs Commissioner on 11 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-05-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-23T06:01:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bhartiben vs Commissioner on 11 May, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Bhartiben vs Commissioner on 11 May, 2010 - 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\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bhartiben vs Commissioner on 11 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-05-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-12-23T06:01:27+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":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bhartiben vs Commissioner on 11 May, 2010","datePublished":"2010-05-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-23T06:01:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010"},"wordCount":747,"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\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010","name":"Bhartiben vs Commissioner on 11 May, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-05-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-23T06:01:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhartiben-vs-commissioner-on-11-may-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bhartiben vs Commissioner on 11 May, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/255737","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=255737"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/255737\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=255737"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=255737"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=255737"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}