{"id":259494,"date":"2007-01-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-01-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007"},"modified":"2017-04-18T04:41:45","modified_gmt":"2017-04-17T23:11:45","slug":"shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007","title":{"rendered":"Shoukathali vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Shoukathali vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2007<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nBail Appl No. 467 of 2007()\n\n\n\n1. SHOUKATHALI, S\/O.HAMSA\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.DEVIDAS.U.K\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR\n\n Dated :22\/01\/2007\n\n O R D E R\n                                   V. RAMKUMAR, J.\n\n                            -------------------------------\n\n                       Bail Application No. 467 of 2007\n\n                            -------------------------------\n\n                           DATED: 22nd January,  2007\n\n\n                                         O R D E\n                                                     R\n\n\n\n         Petitioner   who   is   the     accused   in   Crime   No.441\/2005     of\n\n\n\nPerinthalmanna     Police   Station   for   offences   punishable   under   Secs.   353,\n\n\n\n323 and 506(1)  I.P.C<\/a>., seeks anticipatory bail.\n\n\n\n       2.      Consequent on the   non-appearance  of the   petitioner before\n\n\n\nthe   J.F.C.M.- II, Perinthalmanna   in C.C. 473\/05 on 19-09-2006 and the\n\n\n\nrejection   of   the   application   filed   on   his   behalf     to   excuse   his   absence,\n\n\n\nthe   learned   magistrate   issued   non-bailable   warrants   of   arrest   against   the\n\n\n\nthe   accused   and   the   same   is   pending.         Anticipatory   bail   cannot   be\n\n\n\nissued   to   nullify   the   process   issued   by   a   court   of   competent   jurisdiction.\n\n\n\nThere   is   no   reason   why   the   petitioner   should   not   surrender   before   the\n\n\n\nMagistrate   concerned  and   seek   regular   bail.    Accordingly,   if   the  petitioner\n\n\n\nsurrenders  before  the   Magistrate  concerned  and  files  an   application   for\n\n\n\nregular   bail   on   25-01-2007   the   Magistrate   shall   enlarge   the   petitioner   on\n\n\n\nfresh bail on appropriate conditions.\n\n\n\n       With the above observation this application is disposed of.\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                                V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.\n\n\nani\n\n\n\n? IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\n+AS No. 427 of 1994(B)\n\n\n\n#1. K.J.JOSEPH\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n$1. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD.\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n!                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.AGADEESACHANDRAN NAIR\n\n^                For Respondent  :SRI.K.P.SREEKUMAR,S.GOPINATH,MANU JOSEPH\n\n*Coram\n The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN\n\n% Dated :02\/01\/2007\n\n: O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
                   THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J<\/p>\n
                   ————————————————\n<\/p>\n
                           A.S. No.427  Of 1994 &<\/p>\n
                            C.M.P.No.2609 of 1994<\/p>\n
                  ————————————————-\n<\/p>\n
               Dated this the 2nd  day of January, 2007.\n<\/p>\n
                                  J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n
       This appeal is by the plaintiff in a suit for money.\n<\/p>\n
2.     The   plaintiff,   the   proprietor   of   the   Small   Scale   Industrial   Unit<\/p>\n
having   a   quick   lime   project,   allegedly   lost   raw   materials,   finished<\/p>\n
products and the entire industry, attributed to be the result of heavy<\/p>\n
rain   and   storm   and     resulted   collapsing   of   the   factory.     He   had<\/p>\n
availed a loan from the 2nd  defendant bank for the purpose of  that<\/p>\n
industry.   The   banker   had,   on   his   behalf,   obtained   an   insurance<\/p>\n
coverage   from   the   1st  defendant-   insurer.     But   when   the   plaintiff<\/p>\n
suffered the loss and looked up to the insurer, it turned out that  the<\/p>\n
policy availed by the bank, Fire ‘C’ policy,   covers only the fire, but<\/p>\n
not flood.   However, if it were Fire ‘A’ policy it would have covered<\/p>\n
fire   and   flood.     The   insurer   refuted   the   claim,   leading   to   the   suit<\/p>\n
from which the appeal arises.\n<\/p>\n
A.S. No.427  Of 1994 &<\/p>\n
C.M.P.No.2609 of 1994<\/p>\n
                                            2<\/span><\/p>\n
3.     Having   regard   to   the   nature   of   the   contentions   of   the   1st<\/p>\n
defendant   insurer,   the   banker   was   impleaded   as   additional<\/p>\n
defendant,   at   the   instance   of   the   plaintiff,   as   per   order   dated<\/p>\n
29.05.92   in   I.A.No.865\/92.     However,   in   its   wisdom,   the   banker<\/p>\n
chose to remain ex-parte in the proceedings before the court below.\n<\/p>\n
The suit was ultimately dismissed holding that a Fire ‘C’ policy does<\/p>\n
not   cover   flood   and   the   plaintiff   is   not   entitled   to   that   relief   as<\/p>\n
against the insurer.  However, the judgment  appears to be eloquent<\/p>\n
regarding     negligence   of   the   banker   in   the   matter   of   availing   the<\/p>\n
appropriate policy.   It was also noticed that if it had been a Fire ‘A’<\/p>\n
policy,   the   plaintiff’s   claim     would   have   sustained,   as   stated   in<\/p>\n
paragraph 23 of the judgment which reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n
                      “Of   course,   it   cannot   be   disputed   that   in<\/p>\n
              case 2nd defendant insured the unit under  A policy<\/p>\n
              by   applying   for   issuance   of   the   same   to   first<\/p>\n
              defendant,   the   plaintiff’s   claim   would   have<\/p>\n
              sustained.   Plaintiff who is also the co-insurer was<\/p>\n
              bound   to   enquire   about   the   nature   of   the   policy<\/p>\n
              taken by the mortgagee, the 2nd defendant, and to<\/p>\n
              enquire   about   the   quantum   of   insurance   and<\/p>\n
              scope of Insurance.  At any rate the negligence of<\/p>\n
              additional   2nd  defendant   bank   looms   large   in<\/p>\n
              having   not   applied   for   insuring   the   plaintiff’s   SSI<\/p>\n
              unit under A policy.  But this cannot fasten liability<\/p>\n
              on   additional   2nd        defendant   especially   when<\/p>\n
              plaintiff does not claim any relief against it.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
A.S. No.427  Of 1994 &<\/p>\n
C.M.P.No.2609 of 1994<\/p>\n
                                                 3<\/span><\/p>\n
4.      The   learned   counsel   for   the   appellant   urges   that   in   terms   of<\/p>\n
the All India Fire Tariff, the insurer is obliged in law to issue a Fire ‘A’<\/p>\n
policy  when  it insurers  a small  scale  industry  and  that  the  said  All<\/p>\n
India   Fire   Tariff   has   been   held   to   be   a   piece   of   subordinate<\/p>\n
legislation   by   at   least   three   different   High   Courts   viz.Allahabad,<\/p>\n
Jammu & Kashmir and Karnataka. However, the learned counsel for<\/p>\n
the insurer urges that  even  going by  the said    All India  Fire  Tariff,<\/p>\n
any obligation of the insurer to issue a Fire ‘A’policy would be only<\/p>\n
in a case where a Fire ‘A’ policy and Fire ‘B’ policy is applied for and<\/p>\n
such   an   instance   would   not   emerge   out   of     All   India   Fire   Tariff   in<\/p>\n
cases where the application is only for  Fire ‘C’ policy.  However, the<\/p>\n
impugned   judgment   does   not   reflect   any   consideration   of   the     All<\/p>\n
India   Fire   Tariff.       This   is   in   spite   of   the   fact   that   the   plaintiff   had<\/p>\n
applied before the court below to direct the insurer to produce the<\/p>\n
All India Fire Tariff, which application was  dismissed as belated. But<\/p>\n
if that is a piece of subordinate  legislation,  it is  not required to be<\/p>\n
produced as an item of evidence.   It needs to be referred only as a<\/p>\n
part of the law of the land.\n<\/p>\n
A.S. No.427  Of 1994 &<\/p>\n
C.M.P.No.2609 of 1994<\/p>\n
                                        4<\/span><\/p>\n
5.    Along   with   the   appeal,   on   appropriate   legal   advice,   the<\/p>\n
plaintiff       filed  C.M.P.No.2609  of  1994  seeking   leave   to   amend  the<\/p>\n
plaint,   thereby   claiming   relief   against   the   banker-2nd  defendant.\n<\/p>\n
That  application for amendment is pending for  consideration  along<\/p>\n
with this appeal.  However, I do not find any objections having been<\/p>\n
filed to that petition. Having regard to the facts and circumstances<\/p>\n
of the case,   it is appropriate to give the plaintiff an opportunity to<\/p>\n
amend the plaint to seek relief against the 2nd defendant also.  This<\/p>\n
is because if the 2nd defendant-banker had insisted on a policy being<\/p>\n
taken, it needs to be decided as to whether the bank was obliged to<\/p>\n
ensure that the appropriate policy was taken and if so whether it is<\/p>\n
liable for any inaction or negligence on its part.\n<\/p>\n
6.    Though   the   court   below   has   stated     its   views   regarding   the<\/p>\n
negligence of additional 2nd defendant, I do not deem it appropriate<\/p>\n
to   sustain   those   findings,   particularly   when   the   2nd  defendant<\/p>\n
remained   ex-parte,   may   be   due   to   the   fact   that   no   relief   was<\/p>\n
claimed   against   the   2nd  defendant   as   such.     Such   findings   are<\/p>\n
vacated.\n<\/p>\n
A.S. No.427  Of 1994 &<\/p>\n
C.M.P.No.2609 of 1994<\/p>\n
                                      5<\/span><\/p>\n
      In the result:\n<\/p>\n
     (1)   The  impugned  decree is set aside  and  the case remitted<\/p>\n
       for   reconsideration   to   the   trial   court.   L.C.Rs   shall   be<\/p>\n
       transmitted forthwith.\n<\/p>\n
     (2)   C.M.P.No.2609 of 1994 is allowed.\n<\/p>\n
     (3)   The parties will appear  before  the court below on  the 6th<\/p>\n
       day of February,2007.\n<\/p>\n
     (4)   The  plaintiff  will carry  out  the  amendments  as  per C.M.P<\/p>\n
       No.2609   of   1994   on  such   day   as   may   be   permitted   by  the<\/p>\n
       trial court after receipt of the L.C.Rs.\n<\/p>\n
     (5)  After   the   amendment   of   plaint   is   carried   out,   the<\/p>\n
       defendants   will   be   granted   opportunity   to   file   further<\/p>\n
       pleadings.\n<\/p>\n
A.S. No.427  Of 1994 &<\/p>\n
C.M.P.No.2609 of 1994<\/p>\n
                                          6<\/span><\/p>\n
      (6)   All  parties  will  be   entitled  to   place   further  pleadings   and<\/p>\n
        adduce further evidence.\n<\/p>\n
      (7)      The   order   of   the   stay   of   O.S.No.271\/94   granted   on<\/p>\n
        20.06.05   in   that   suit   under   Section   10   of   the   Code   of   Civil<\/p>\n
        Procedure   will   continue   until   final   disposal   of   the   suit,<\/p>\n
        following this remand order.\n<\/p>\n
      (8)  Having regard to the peculiar circumstances of the case, it<\/p>\n
        is   directed   that   the   full   amount   of   court   fee   paid   on   the<\/p>\n
        memorandum of appeal will be refunded to the appellant .\n<\/p>\n
                                   THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN,<\/p>\n
                                                          JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
sj<\/p>\n
A.S. No.427  Of 1994 &<\/p>\n
C.M.P.No.2609 of 1994<\/p>\n
                           7<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Shoukathali vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Bail Appl No. 467 of 2007() 1. SHOUKATHALI, S\/O.HAMSA … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.DEVIDAS.U.K For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon’ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR Dated :22\/01\/2007 O R […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-259494","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nShoukathali vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2007 - 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\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shoukathali vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-01-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-04-17T23:11:45+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\\\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shoukathali vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-01-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-17T23:11:45+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1086,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007\",\"name\":\"Shoukathali vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-01-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-17T23:11:45+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shoukathali vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"Shoukathali vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2007 - 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\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shoukathali vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-01-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-04-17T23:11:45+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\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shoukathali vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2007","datePublished":"2007-01-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-17T23:11:45+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007"},"wordCount":1086,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007","name":"Shoukathali vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-01-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-17T23:11:45+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shoukathali-vs-state-of-kerala-on-22-january-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shoukathali vs State Of Kerala on 22 January, 2007"}]},{"@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\/259494","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=259494"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/259494\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=259494"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=259494"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=259494"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}