{"id":261282,"date":"2010-02-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010"},"modified":"2017-11-24T09:27:11","modified_gmt":"2017-11-24T03:57:11","slug":"appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"Appearance : vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 22 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Appearance : vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 22 February, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/334\/2002\t 6\/ 8\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 334 of 2002\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:\n \n\n  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED\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\n\t\t\tbe referred 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\nASHWINBHAI\nH ACHARYA \n\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nPRABHUDAS\nKESHAVLAL & 2 \n\n \n\n=========================================\n \nAppearance : \nMR\nUTPAL M PANCHAL for Appellant \nMR AM PAREKH for Respondent Nos. 1 -\n2 \nMR DC SEJPAL ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent\nNo.3 \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\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 22\/02\/2010 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n
[1]\tThe
\npresent appeal, under section 378<\/a> of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
\n1973, is directed against the judgment and order of acquittal dated
\n13.03.2001 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class
\n(Municipal), Rajkot, in Criminal Case No.497 of 1989, whereby the
\naccused has been acquitted of the charges leveled against them.\n<\/p>\n
[2]\tThe
\nbrief facts of the prosecution case are that the respondent Nos.1 and
\n2 are running a shop in Kandoi Bazzar, Rajkot in the name and style
\nof  Nanda Stores . On 24.05.1989, the complainant visited the
\nshop of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and he had taken the sample of
\nmukhvas from the respondent No.2 and as per the prescribed procedure,
\nthe said sample was sent for analysis to the Public Analyst, Baroda.
\nThe Public Analyst has reported that the sample was adulterated and
\nthere was an addition of artificial colour. After obtaining sanction,
\nthe complainant filed the complaint in the Court of learned Judicial
\nMagistrate, First Class (Municipal), Rajkot and came to the above
\nconclusion.\n<\/p>\n
[3]\tTo
\nprove the case against the present accused, the prosecution has
\nexamined the witnesses  and also produced       documentary evidence.\n<\/p>\n
[4]\tAt
\nthe end of trial,  after recording the statement of the accused under
\nsection 313<\/a> of Cr.P.C., and hearing arguments on behalf of
\nprosecution and the defence, the  learned trial Judge acquitted the
\nrespondent of all the charges leveled against them by judgment and
\norder dated 13.03.2001.\n<\/p>\n
[5]\tBeing
\naggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and order
\npassed by the trial Court the appellant State has preferred the
\npresent appeal.\n<\/p>\n
[6]\tHeard
\nMr.Utpal M. Panchal, learned advocate for the appellant and Mr.D. C.
\nSejpal, learned APP for the respondent No.3   State.\n<\/p>\n
[7]\tIt
\nwas contended by learned advocate for the appellant that the judgment
\nand order of the trial Court is against the provisions of law; the
\ntrial Court has not properly considered the evidence led by the
\nprosecution and looking to the provisions of law itself it is
\nestablished that the prosecution has proved the whole ingredients of
\nthe offence against the present respondent. Learned advocate for the
\nappellant was contended that the trial Court has not properly
\nconsidered the relevant evidence on record and has not properly
\nappreciated the evidence in true spirit. It was also contended that
\nthe trial Court has not considered the deposition of the panch
\nwitness at Ex.90. It was further contended that trial Court has
\ncommitted an error in coming to the conclusion that there is
\ncontradiction in the version of the complainant, witness and the
\npanch witness. He has further submitted that there is sufficient
\nevidence on record to convict the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and there is
\nno contradiction in the version of the the witnesses and the
\ndeposition of the complainant is proper. Learned advocate for the
\nappellant has also taken this court  through the oral as well  as the
\nentire documentary evidence.\n<\/p>\n
[8]\tAt
\nthe outset it is required to be noted that the principles which would
\ngovern and regulate the hearing of appeal by this Court against an
\norder of acquittal passed by the trial Court have been very
\nsuccinctly explained by the Apex Court in a catena of decisions. In
\nthe case of
\nM.S. Narayana Menon @ Mani Vs. State of Kerala & Anr, reported in
\n(2006)6 SCC, 39,
\nthe Apex Court has narrated about the powers of the High Court in
\nappeal against the order of acquittal. In para 54 of the decision,
\nthe Apex Court has observed as under:\n<\/p>\n
 54.
\n In any event the High Court entertained an appeal treating to be an
\nappeal against acquittal, it was in fact exercising the revisional
\njurisdiction. Even while exercising an appellate power against a
\njudgment of acquittal, the High Court should have borne in mind the
\nwell-settled principles of law that where two view are possible, the
\nappellate court should not interfere with the finding of acquittal
\nrecorded by the court below.\n<\/p>\n
[9]\tFurther,
\nin the case of Chandrappa
\nVs. State of Karnataka, reported in (2007)4 SCC 415
\nthe Apex Court laid down the following principles:\n<\/p>\n
 42.\tFrom
\nthe above decisions, in our considered view, the following general
\nprinciples regarding powers of the appellate court while dealing with
\nan appeal against an order of acquittal emerge:\n<\/p>\n
[1]\tAn
\nappellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider
\nthe evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.\n<\/p>\n
[2]\tThe
\nCode<\/a> of Criminal Procedure, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or
\ncondition on exercise of such power and an appellate court on the
\nevidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of
\nfact and of law.\n<\/p>\n
[3]\tVarious
\nexpressions, such as,  substantial and compelling reasons ,  good
\nand sufficient grounds ,  very strong circumstances ,
\n distorted conclusions ,  glaring mistakes , etc. are not
\nintended to curtain extensive powers of an appellate court in an
\nappeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature
\nof  flourishes of language  to emphasis the reluctance of an
\nappellate court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power
\nof the court to review the evidence and to come to its own
\nconclusion.\n<\/p>\n
[4]\tAn
\nappellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal
\nthere is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the
\npresumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental
\nprinciple of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be
\npresumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent
\ncourt of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the
\npresumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and
\nstrengthened by the trial court.\n<\/p>\n
[5]\tIf
\ntwo reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence
\non record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of
\nacquittal recorded by the trial court.\n<\/p>\n
[10]\tThus,
\nit is a settled principle that while exercising appellate power, even
\nif two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the
\nevidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the
\nfinding  of acquittal recorded by the trial court.\n<\/p>\n
[11]\tEven
\nin a recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of State
\nof Goa V. Sanjay Thakran & Anr. Reported<\/a> in (2007)3 SCC 75,
\nthe  Court has reiterated the powers of the High Court in such cases.
\nIn para 16 of the said decision the Court has observed as under:\n<\/p>\n
 16.\tFrom
\nthe aforesaid decisions, it is apparent that while exercising the
\npowers in appeal against the order of acquittal the Court of appeal
\nwould not ordinarily interfere with the order of acquittal unless the
\napproach of the lower Court is vitiated by some manifest illegality
\nand the conclusion arrived at would not be arrived at by any
\nreasonable person and, therefore, the decision is to be characterized
\nas perverse. Merely because two views are possible, the Court of
\nappeal would not take the view which would upset the judgment
\ndelivered by the  Court below. However, the appellate court has a
\npower to review the evidence if it is of the view that the conclusion
\narrived at by the Court below is perverse and the Court has committed
\na manifest error of law and ignored the material evidence on record.
\nA duty is cast upon the appellate court, in such circumstances, to
\nre-appreciate the evidence to arrive to a just decision on the basis
\nof material placed on record to find out whether any of the accused
\nis connected with the commission of the crime he is charged with.\n<\/p>\n
[12]\tSimilar
\nprinciple has been laid down by the Apex  Court  in the cases of
\nState of
\nUttar Pradesh Vs. Ram Veer Singh & Ors, reported in 2007 AIR SCW
\n5553 and
\nin Girja
\nPrasad (Dead) by LRs Vs. state of MP, reported in 2007 AIR SCW 5589.
\nThus, the powers which this Court may exercise against an order of
\nacquittal are well settled.\n<\/p>\n
[13]\tIt
\nis also a settled legal position that in acquittal appeal, the
\nappellate court is not required to re-write the judgment or to give
\nfresh reasonings, when the reasons assigned by the Court below are
\nfound to be
\njust and proper. Such principle is laid down by the Apex Court
\nin the  case of State
\nof Karnataka Vs. Hemareddy, reported in AIR 1981 SC 1417,
\nwherein, it is held as under:\n<\/p>\n
 &
\nThis court has observed
\nin Girija Nandini Devi V. Bigendra Nandini Chaudhary (1967)1 SCR
\n93: (AIR 1967 SC 1124) that it is not the duty of the appellate
\ncourt when it agrees with the view of the trial court on the evidence
\nto repeat the narration of the evidence or to reiterate the reasons
\ngiven by the trial court expression of general agreement with the
\nreasons given by the Court the decision of which is under appeal,
\nwill ordinarily suffice.\n<\/p>\n
[14]\tThus,
\nin case the  appellate court agrees with the reasons and the opinion
\ngiven by the lower court, then the discussion of evidence is not
\nnecessary.\n<\/p>\n
[15]\tI
\nhave gone through the judgment and order passed by the trial court. I
\nhave also perused the oral as well as documentary evidence led by the
\ntrial court and also considered the submissions made by learned
\nadvocate for the appellant. The trial court has clearly recorded a
\nfinding that there is contradiction in the version of the
\ncomplainant, witness and the panch witness. The trial Court has also
\nfound that the prosecution has failed to prove that the vessel  which
\nis used for analysis of the sample was dry and clean  and the
\nprosecution has failed to follow prescribed procedure under Rule 14
\nof the PFA Rules. From the above conclusion, it appears that  there
\nis serious contradictions in the oral evidences of the complainant,
\nwitnesses and the panch witness. It also appears that the prosecution
\nhas not followed Rule 14 of the PFA Rules. Thus, from the evidence
\nitself it is established that the prosecution has not proved its case
\nbeyond reasonable doubt.\n<\/p>\n
[16]\tLearned
\nadvocate for the appellant is not in a position to show any evidence
\nto take a contrary view of the matter or that the approach of the
\ntrial court is vitiated by some manifest illegality or that the
\ndecision is perverse or that the trial court has ignored the material
\nevidence on record.\n<\/p>\n
[17]\tIn
\nthe above view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that the
\ntrial court was completely justified in acquitting the respondent of
\nthe charges leveled against him.\n<\/p>\n
[18]\tI
\nfind that the findings recorded by the trial court are absolutely
\njust and proper and in recording the said findings, no illegality or
\ninfirmity has been committed by it.\n<\/p>\n
[19]\tI,
\ntherefore, in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate
\nconclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the court
\nbelow and hence find no reasons to interfere with the same. Hence the
\nappeal is hereby dismissed. Bail bonds, if any, stands cancelled.  In
\ncase, Record  & Proceedings is received by this Court, the same
\nshall be returned to the trial Court forthwith.\n<\/p>\n
[
\nZ. K. SAIYED,J. ]<\/p>\n
(vijay)<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Appearance : vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 22 February, 2010 Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/334\/2002 6\/ 8 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 334 of 2002 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED ========================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local […]<\/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-261282","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAppearance : vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 22 February, 2010 - 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\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Appearance : vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 22 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-11-24T03:57:11+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Appearance : vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 22 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-24T03:57:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1818,\"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\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010\",\"name\":\"Appearance : vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 22 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-24T03:57:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Appearance : vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 22 February, 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":"Appearance : vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 22 February, 2010 - 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\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Appearance : vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 22 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-11-24T03:57:11+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Appearance : vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 22 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-24T03:57:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010"},"wordCount":1818,"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\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010","name":"Appearance : vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 22 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-24T03:57:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/appearance-vs-state-of-kerala-anr-on-22-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Appearance : vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 22 February, 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\/261282","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=261282"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/261282\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=261282"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=261282"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=261282"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}