{"id":257143,"date":"2004-02-26T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-02-25T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004"},"modified":"2015-01-12T15:49:51","modified_gmt":"2015-01-12T10:19:51","slug":"sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004","title":{"rendered":"Sajan Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sajan Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2004<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: B Singh<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: N. Santosh Hegde, B.P. Singh<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (crl.)  1022 of 1997\n\nPETITIONER:\nSajan Abraham\n\nRESPONDENT:\nState of Kerala\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 26\/02\/2004\n\nBENCH:\nN. SANTOSH HEGDE &amp; B.P. SINGH\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n<p>B.P. Singh, J.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">\tThe appellant herein was charged of having committed<br \/>\nthe offence punishable under <a href=\"\/doc\/1566465\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 21<\/a> of the Narcotic Drugs<br \/>\nand <a href=\"\/doc\/1727139\/\" id=\"a_1\">Psychotropic Substances Act<\/a>, 1985 (hereinafter referred to<br \/>\nas &#8216;the <a href=\"\/doc\/1727139\/\" id=\"a_2\">NDPS Act<\/a>&#8216;) and was put up for trial before the Ist<br \/>\nAdditional Sessions Court, Ernakulam.  The case of the<br \/>\nprosecution was that on 10th October, 1993 at about 7.45 p.m.<br \/>\nhe was found in possession of 25 ampoules of manufactured<br \/>\ndrug, namely  Buprenorphine Hydrocholride (Tidigesic)<br \/>\nalongwith three syringes when he was apprehended on the road<br \/>\nnear Blue Tronics Junction, Palluruthy.  The learned Additional<br \/>\nSessions Judge by his judgment and order dated 5th March,<br \/>\n1994 acquitted the appellant of the charge levelled against him.<br \/>\nOn appeal by the State being Criminal Appeal No. 533 of 1994<br \/>\nthe acquittal of the appellant was set aside and the appeal<br \/>\npreferred by the State was allowed.  The appellant was found<br \/>\nguilty of the offence punishable under <a href=\"\/doc\/1566465\/\" id=\"a_3\">Section 21<\/a> of the NDPS<br \/>\nAct and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for<br \/>\n10 years and to pay a fine of rupees one lakh, in default to<br \/>\nundergo simple imprisonment for one year.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">\tThe appellant preferred an appeal before this Court being<br \/>\nCriminal Appeal No. 1022 of  1997 but the same was dismissed<br \/>\nby this Court by judgment and order dated 7th August, 2001.<br \/>\nThe appellant then filed a review petition being Review Petition<br \/>\n(Crl.) No.1236 of 2001 which was allowed by this Court and<br \/>\nthe appeal restored to its original number.  The appeal has now<br \/>\nbeen placed before us for disposal.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">\tWhile allowing the review petition this Court observed<br \/>\nthat the appellant should have taken up a plea in the light of the<br \/>\ndecision of this Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/1826130\/\" id=\"a_4\">Hussain  vs.  State of Kerala<\/a> : (2000) 8<br \/>\nSCC 139 in which the same article Buprenorphine<br \/>\nHydrocholride (Tidigesic) was found to be a psychotropic<br \/>\nsubstance and the quantity which was found in possession of<br \/>\nthe accused was within the prescribed limit, being a small<br \/>\nquantity.  Consequently benefit of the same was granted to the<br \/>\naccused in that case and he was acquitted.  This Court felt,<br \/>\nwhile allowing the review petition, that the appellant should be<br \/>\npermitted to take up that contention in this case in order to<br \/>\nprevent a miscarriage of justice.  This Court noticed that the<br \/>\ntotal quantity involved is 25 ampoules of Buprenorphine<br \/>\nHydrocholride (Titidigesic) of 2 ml. each.  Counsel for the State<br \/>\nof Kerala submitted that the limit of small quantity as per the<br \/>\nNotification is 1 gm.  Thus the total quantity seized from the<br \/>\nappellant would fall within the limit of small quantity used for<br \/>\nmedicinal purposes.  The appellant was permitted to file a<br \/>\npetition seeking permission to raise additional grounds in the<br \/>\nappeal.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">\tAn application has been filed by the appellant for<br \/>\npermission to urge additional grounds in his appeal.  We allow<br \/>\nthe said application.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">\tIt was not disputed before us by the learned counsel<br \/>\nappearing on behalf of the State that the total quantity seized<br \/>\nfrom the appellant would fall within the limit prescribed under<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/363765\/\" id=\"a_5\">Section 27<\/a> of small quantity to be used for medicinal purpose,<br \/>\nnamely  1 gm.  It is also not contended that the quantity seized<br \/>\nfrom the appellant was in excess of the quantity prescribed<br \/>\nunder Rule 66.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">\t<a href=\"\/doc\/1566465\/\" id=\"a_6\">Section 21<\/a> of the NDPS Act, as it stood at the relevant<br \/>\ntime provided as follows :-\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">&#8220;21.\tPunishment for contravention in relation to<br \/>\nmanufactured drugs and preparations.  Whoever,<br \/>\nin contravention of any provision of this Act, or<br \/>\nany rule or order made or condition of licence<br \/>\ngranted thereunder manufactures, possesses, sells,<br \/>\npurchases, transports, imports inter State, exports<br \/>\ninter-State or uses any manufactured drug or any<br \/>\npreparation containing any manufactured drug<br \/>\nshall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for<br \/>\na term which shall not be less than ten years but<br \/>\nwhich may extend to twenty years and shall also<br \/>\nbe liable to fine which shall not be less than one<br \/>\nlakh rupees but which may extend to two lakh<br \/>\nrupees ;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">Provided that the court may, for reasons to<br \/>\nbe recorded in the judgment, impose a fine<br \/>\nexceeding two lakh rupees.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">\tIt is thus apparent that what is made punishable under<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/1566465\/\" id=\"a_7\">Section 21<\/a> is, &#8211;  possession, sale, purchase etc. of the drugs and<br \/>\npreparations mentioned therein in contravention of any<br \/>\nprovision of the Act or any rule or order made or condition of<br \/>\nlicence granted thereunder.  Obviously, therefore, if any rule<br \/>\npermits a person to possess any psychotropic substance within<br \/>\nthe limits specified under the rule and subject to such<br \/>\nconditions as the rule may prescribes, such a person cannot be<br \/>\nheld guilty of the offence under <a href=\"\/doc\/1566465\/\" id=\"a_8\">Section 21<\/a> of the Act if it is<br \/>\nshown that his possession is not in contravention of such rule.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">Rule 66 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic<br \/>\nSubstances Rules, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as &#8216;the NDPS<br \/>\nRules&#8217;) provides as follows :-\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">&#8220;66.\tPossession, etc. of psychotropic substances.<br \/>\n (1)  No person shall possess any psychotropic<br \/>\nsubstance for any of the purpose covered by the<br \/>\n1945 Rules, unless he is lawfully authorized to<br \/>\npossess such substance for any of the said purposes<br \/>\nunder these Rules.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_12\">(2)  Notwithstanding anything contained in<br \/>\nsub-rule (1), any research institution, or a hospital<br \/>\nor dispensary maintained or supported by<br \/>\nGovernment or local body or by charity or<br \/>\nvoluntary subscription, which is not authorized to<br \/>\npossess any psychotropic substance under the 1945<br \/>\nRules, or any person who is not so authorized<br \/>\nunder the 1945 Rules, may possess a reasonable<br \/>\nquantity of such substance as may be necessary for<br \/>\ntheir genuine scientific requirements or genuine<br \/>\nmedical requirements, or both for such period as is<br \/>\ndeemed necessary by the said research institution<br \/>\nor, as the case may be, the said hospital or<br \/>\ndispensary or person :\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_13\">Provided that where such psychotropic<br \/>\nsubstance is in possession of an individual for his<br \/>\npersonal medical use the quantity thereof shall not<br \/>\nexceed one hundred dosage units at a time.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_14\">(3)  The research institution, hospital and<br \/>\ndispensary referred to in sub-rule (2) shall<br \/>\nmaintain proper accounts and records in relation to<br \/>\nthe purchase and consumption of the psychotropic<br \/>\nsubstance in their possession.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_15\">\tSub-rule (2) therefore permits a person to keep in his<br \/>\npossession for his personal medicinal use the psychotropic<br \/>\nsubstance upto one hundred dosage units at a time.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_16\">\tIn the instant case there is evidence on record which<br \/>\nindicates that the appellant used the said drug and this is<br \/>\nobvious from the deposition of the Investigating Officer, PW-3<br \/>\nas well as the deposition of his mother, DW.1.  Moreover three<br \/>\nsyringes were also recovered from the appellant which also is<br \/>\nindicative of the fact that the psychotropic substance recovered<br \/>\nfrom him was for his personal consumption and not for trading<br \/>\npurposes.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_17\">\tIn similar circumstances this Court in Ouseph @<br \/>\nThankachan vs.  State of Kerala (Criminal Appeal No. 1256 of<br \/>\n2001 disposed of on 6th December, 2001) drew such an<br \/>\ninference.  There also the accused was found to possess  110<br \/>\nampoules of the same psychotropic substance together with two<br \/>\nsyringes.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_18\">\t<a href=\"\/doc\/1826130\/\" id=\"a_9\">In Hussain  vs.  State of Kerala<\/a> (supra) the appellant was<br \/>\nfound to possess 6 ampoules of the same psychotropic<br \/>\nsubstance.  This Court allowed the appeal preferred by the<br \/>\naccused giving him the benefit of Rule 66 of the NDPS Rules<br \/>\nwhich permitted the appellant to keep in his possession for his<br \/>\npersonal medicinal use the psychotropic substance upto 100<br \/>\ndosage units at a time.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_19\">\tLearned counsel for the State submitted that unless the<br \/>\nappellant held a permit granted under Rule 66 of the NDPS<br \/>\nRules, he cannot claim benefit under the provisions of that<br \/>\nRule.  We find no substance in the argument because having<br \/>\nregard to the provisions of <a href=\"\/doc\/775154\/\" id=\"a_10\">Section 9<\/a> of the NDPS Act under<br \/>\nwhich the Rules have been framed, the Central Government is<br \/>\nempowered by Rules to permit and regulate the matters<br \/>\nmentioned therein.  Rule 66 itself permits possession of<br \/>\npsychotropic substance below a specified quantity and subject<br \/>\nto the conditions stated therein.  Thus if the possession of<br \/>\npsychotropic substance is justified under the said Rule, no<br \/>\nseparate permit is required to be issued to the person possessing<br \/>\nsuch psychotropic substance because the Rule itself permits<br \/>\npossession of such psychotropic substance to the extent<br \/>\nmentioned in the Rule and subject to the conditions laid down<br \/>\ntherein.  Thus following the principle laid down in <a href=\"\/doc\/1826130\/\" id=\"a_11\">Hussain  vs.<br \/>\nState of Kerala<\/a> (supra) and having regard to the provisions of<br \/>\nRule 66 of the NDPS Rules read with <a href=\"\/doc\/1566465\/\" id=\"a_12\">Section 21<\/a> of the NDPS<br \/>\nAct, we are satisfied that the psychotropic substance namely, &#8211;<br \/>\nBuprenorphine Hydrocholride (Tidigesic) found in possession<br \/>\nof the appellant was not in breach of Rule 66 of the NDPS<br \/>\nRules and having regard to the fact that the same was for his<br \/>\npersonal consumption, no offence under <a href=\"\/doc\/1566465\/\" id=\"a_13\">Section 21<\/a> of the<br \/>\nNDPS Act is made out.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_20\">\tIn the result this appeal is allowed and the appellant is<br \/>\nacquitted of the charge levelled against him.  The appellant is<br \/>\non bail.  His bail bonds are discharged.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Sajan Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2004 Author: B Singh Bench: N. Santosh Hegde, B.P. Singh CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 1022 of 1997 PETITIONER: Sajan Abraham RESPONDENT: State of Kerala DATE OF JUDGMENT: 26\/02\/2004 BENCH: N. SANTOSH HEGDE &amp; B.P. SINGH JUDGMENT: J U D G M E [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-257143","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Sajan Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2004 - 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\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sajan Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004\" \/>\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=\"2004-02-25T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-01-12T10:19:51+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sajan Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-02-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-01-12T10:19:51+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004\"},\"wordCount\":1470,\"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\\\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004\",\"name\":\"Sajan Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-02-25T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-01-12T10:19:51+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sajan Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2004\"}]},{\"@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":"Sajan Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2004 - 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\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sajan Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-02-25T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-01-12T10:19:51+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sajan Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2004","datePublished":"2004-02-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-01-12T10:19:51+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004"},"wordCount":1470,"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\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004","name":"Sajan Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-02-25T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-01-12T10:19:51+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajan-abraham-vs-state-of-kerala-on-26-february-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sajan Abraham vs State Of Kerala on 26 February, 2004"}]},{"@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\/257143","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=257143"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/257143\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=257143"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=257143"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=257143"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}