{"id":262682,"date":"2010-08-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010"},"modified":"2017-02-25T04:44:02","modified_gmt":"2017-02-24T23:14:02","slug":"narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"Narendrabhai vs State on 23 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Narendrabhai vs State on 23 August, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: M.R. Shah,&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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/10655\/2005\t 10\/ 10\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. 10655 of 2005\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH \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\nNARENDRABHAI\nDAHYABHAI DESAI & 1 - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT & 4 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n==========================================  \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nDHIRENDRA MEHTA for\nPetitioner(s) : 1 - 2. \nMR. P.D.BHATE, ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for\nRespondent(s) : 1-2. \nNOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 -\n2. \nNone for Respondent(s)\n: 3, \nMRS NISHA M PARIKH for Respondent(s) : 3.2.1,3.2.2 -\n4. \nUNSERVED-EXPIRED (N) for Respondent(s) : 3.2.3\n \nUNSERVED-REFUSED (N) for Respondent(s) :\n5, \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\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 05\/09\/2005 \n\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n
In
\n\tthis petition under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution of India, the
\n\tpetitioners-original landlords have challenged the legality and
\n\tvalidity of the judgment and order passed by the Gujarat Revenue
\n\tTribunal dated 30.11.2004 passed in Revision Application No.
\n\tTEN.B.S. 156\/91 in allowing the said Revision Application and
\n\tquashing and setting aside the order passed by the Deputy Collector,
\n\tNavsari dated 7.6.91 and restoring the order passed by the Mamlatdar
\n\t& ALT, Gandevi dated 18.1.90 in holding that the respondent No.3
\n\therein is entitled to get the possession of the lands in question
\n\tunder Section 32(1-B) of the Bombay Tenancy Act and further
\n\tdirecting the petitioners to hand over the possession of the lands
\n\tin question.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tdispute is with regard to the lands bearing Survey No.746 paiki
\n\tadmeasuring 14-Gunthas of land and Survey No.772 paiki admeasuring
\n\t14-Gunthas of land situated at village Amalsad, Taluka Gandevi,
\n\tDistrict Navsari. The father of the respondent No.3-Govindbhai Gohil
\n\twas cultivating the aforesaid lands in question on 1.4.55 and he was
\n\tdispossessed without following any procedure as required under
\n\tSection 29 of the Act and therefore, the heirs of the
\n\ttenant-Govindbhai Gohil i.e. respondent No.3 herein applied for
\n\tgetting the possession of the lands under Section 32(1-B) of the
\n\tBombay Tenancy Act and the Mamlatdar & ALT, Gandevi by two
\n\tseparate orders dated  18.6.79 and 18.8.79 directed the petitioners
\n\tto hand over the possession of the aforesaid lands in question by
\n\tholding that though the tenant was in possession of the aforesaid
\n\tlands in question as on 15.6.55, he was dispossessed without
\n\tfollowing any procedure and illegally. The said orders came to be
\n\tpassed under Section 32(1-B) of the Bombay Tenancy Act. It appears
\n\tthat thereafter the aforesaid two orders came to be challenged
\n\tbefore the Deputy Collector (Appeals), Navsari by two separate
\n\tRevision Applications and the proceedings were remanded to the
\n\tMamlatdar & ALT, Gandevi directing the Mamlatdar & ALT,
\n\tGandevi to hold inquiry ‘whether the tenant was in fact tenant as on
\n\t15.6.55 or not’ and ‘when the possession was taken over.’ The
\n\taforesaid two orders came to be challenged before the Gujarat
\n\tRevenue Tribunal being Revision Application Nos. TEN.B.S.295\/82 and
\n\tTEN.B.S.296\/82 and both the Revision Applications came to be
\n\tdismissed and the order of remand came to be confirmed. Thereafter,
\n\ton holding necessary inquiry and on appreciation of evidence, the
\n\tMamlatdar & ALT, Gandevi held that the tenant was cultivating
\n\tand\/or in possession of the lands in question as on 15.6.55 and that
\n\the was dispossessed illegally without following any procedure and
\n\ttherefore, the applicant i.e. respondent No.3 herein is entitled to
\n\tpossession of the lands in question under Section 32(1-B) of the
\n\tBombay Tenancy Act and therefore, directed the petitioners to hand
\n\tover the possession of the lands in question to the respondent No.3
\n\therein. The said order came to be passed by the Mamlatdar & ALT,
\n\tGandevi on 18.1.90. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the  order
\n\tpassed by the Mamlatdar & ALT, Gandevi dated 18.1.90, the
\n\tpetitioners preferred appeal before the Deputy Collector, Navsari
\n\tbeing Tenancy Appeal No.54\/90 and the Deputy Collector, Navsari by
\n\tits judgment and order dated 7.6.91 allowed the said appeal and
\n\tquashed and set aside the order passed by the Mamlatdar & ALT,
\n\tGandevi. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the  judgment and
\n\torder passed by the Deputy Collector, Navsari dated 7.6.91 passed in
\n\tTenancy Appeal No.54\/90, the respondent No.3 herein preferred
\n\tRevision Application being Revision Application  No. TEN.B.S.156\/91
\n\tbefore the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal and the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal
\n\tby its judgment and order dated 30.11.2004 allowed the said Revision
\n\tApplication quashing and setting aside the judgment and order passed
\n\tby the Deputy Collector, Navsari dated 7.6.91 passed in Tenancy
\n\tAppeal No.54\/90 and restoring the order passed by the Mamlatdar &
\n\tALT, Gandevi dated 18.1.90 by which the petitioners were directed to
\n\thand over the possession of the lands in question to the respondent
\n\tNo.3 under Section 32(1-B) of the Bombay Tenancy Act. Being
\n\taggrieved and dissatisfied with the  judgment and order passed by
\n\tthe Gujarat Revenue Tribunal dated 30.11.2004 passed in Revision
\n\tApplication No.TEN.B.S.156\/91, the petitioners have preferred the
\n\tpresent Special Civil Application under Article 227<\/a> of the
\n\tConstitution of India.\n<\/p>\n
Shri
\n\tDhiren Mehta, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
\n\tpetitioners has vehemently submitted that the Gujarat Revenue
\n\tTribunal has materially erred in holding that the tenant was in
\n\tpossession of the lands in question as on 15.6.55 and that he was
\n\tdispossessed without following any procedure. He has also further
\n\tsubmitted that the application submitted by the respondent No.3
\n\therein under Section 32(1-B) of the Bombay Tenancy Act was barred by
\n\tlimitation because as per Section 32(1-B) of the Act, he was
\n\trequired to submit the application within a period of one year and
\n\ttherefore also the application submitted by the respondent No.3 was
\n\trequired to be dismissed. He has relied upon the deposition of the
\n\toriginal landlords as well as Premabhai Gohil the son of the
\n\toriginal tenant as well as other persons in support of his
\n\tsubmission that the possession of the lands in question was not with
\n\tthe original tenant i.e. Govindbhai Gohil as on 15.6.55 but the
\n\toriginal tenant had voluntarily surrendered the possession of the
\n\tlands in question in the year  1954 i.e. prior to 1955 and
\n\ttherefore, the respondent No.3 is not entitled to the possession of
\n\tthe lands in question under Section 32(1-B) of the Bombay Tenancy
\n\tAct. Shri Mehta, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
\n\tpetitioners  has also further submitted that the Gujarat Revenue
\n\tTribunal has not properly appreciated the finding given by the
\n\tDeputy Collector, Navsari. Shri Mehta, learned advocate appearing on
\n\tbehalf of the petitioners   has also relied upon the statement of
\n\tthe brother of the original tenant to the effect that he was not in
\n\tpossession of the land in question as on 15.6.55. He has further
\n\tsubmitted that in fact, the Deputy Collector, Navsari has
\n\tspecifically held on appreciation of evidence that the tenant was
\n\tnot in possession of the lands in question as on 15.6.55 and\/or on
\n\t1.4.57 and therefore, the Revisional Authority is not justified in
\n\tinterfering with the same. Thus, the judgment and order passed by
\n\tthe Gujarat Revenue Tribunal is assailed    mainly on two grounds
\n\tthat the application under Section 32(1-B) of the Act is submitted
\n\tafter a period of limitation and that the possession was already
\n\thanded over to the original land owner prior to 15.6.55 and that as
\n\tthe possession of the lands in question was not with the tenant as
\n\ton 15.6.55, the respondent No.3 is not entitled to the possession of
\n\tthe lands in question under Section 32(1-B) of the Bombay Tenancy
\n\tAct.\n<\/p>\n
So
\n\t far as the contention on behalf of the petitioners to the effect
\n\tthat as the application under Section 32(1-B) of the Act was
\n\tsubmitted after a period of one year of dispossession and therefore,
\n\tthe application was not maintainable is concerned, this Court in
\n\tcase of Rasulmiya Rehmanmiya V\/s. Patel Lalbhai Shankerbhai
\n\treported in 24(1) GLR Page-714 has specifically held
\n\tthat even the Mamlatdar & ALT, has suo-motu powers to initiate
\n\tthe proceedings under Section 32(1-B) of the Act where there is no
\n\ttime limit fixed and therefore, it is to be treated that the
\n\tMamlatdar & ALT, has initiated the suo-motu powers and
\n\ttherefore, in view of the judgment of the learned Single Judge of
\n\tthis Court to which this Court is informed that the said judgment
\n\twas thereafter confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and
\n\ttherefore,  the contention of the petitioners that the respondent
\n\tNo.3 is not entitled to any relief as the application under Section
\n\t32(1-B) was submitted after a period of one year, cannot be
\n\taccepted. So far as the finding given by the Gujarat Revenue
\n\tTribunal that the original tenant was in possession of the lands in
\n\tquestion as on 15.6.55 is concerned, the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal as
\n\twell as the Mamlatdar & ALT, Gandevi have relied upon the
\n\tvillage Form No.7\/12 in which upto 1957 the name of the original
\n\ttenant was mentioned. The Gujarat Revenue Tribunal as well as the
\n\tMamlatdar & ALT, Gandevi have also considered the fact that in
\n\tthe year 1957 the original landlords themselves submitted an
\n\tapplication for getting the possession back which was subsequently
\n\twithdrawn, meaning thereby, even as per the landlords themselves the
\n\toriginal tenant was in possession of the lands in question even in
\n\tthe year 1957. Shri Menta, learned advocate appearing on behalf of
\n\tthe petitioners is not in a position to explain withdrawal of the
\n\tapplication submitted by the original landlords in the year 1957.
\n\tShri Mehta, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners
\n\thas relied upon the statement of the brother of the original tenant
\n\tin support of his submission that even it is admitted by him that
\n\tGovindbhai Gohil was in possession of the lands in question as on
\n\t15.6.55 and so  far as the contention that the possession was
\n\talready handed over much earlier is concerned, it is required to be
\n\tnoted that it is the statement of the brother of the tenant and not
\n\tof the tenant himself and the same is not binding upon the tenant.
\n\tEven otherwise, as stated above, on the basis of the evidence on
\n\trecord it is very much clear that the Govindbhai Gohil was in
\n\tpossession of the lands in question as on 15.6.55. It is required to
\n\tbe noted that there is nothing on record to show that the tenant was
\n\tdispossessed and\/or the possession was taken over from him after
\n\tfollowing due procedure as required under Section 29 read with
\n\tSection 5 of the Bombay Tenancy Act. When the tenant is dispossessed
\n\twithout following any procedure as required under Section 29 read
\n\twith Section 5 of the Bombay Tenancy Act, even if the same is
\n\tvolunteered, the tenant is required to hand over the possession and
\n\trestore the possession as per Section 32(1-B) of the Bombay Tenancy
\n\tAct. In view of the above, it cannot be said that the Gujarat
\n\tRevenue Tribunal has committed any illegality and\/or the judgment
\n\tand order passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in restoring the
\n\torder passed by the Mamlatdar & ALT, Gandevi is so  perverse
\n\twhich requires interference of this Court exercising powers under
\n\tArticle 227<\/a> of the Constitution of India. On going through the
\n\tentire record and the order passed by all the three authorities
\n\tbelow even this Court is satisfied that the Mamlatdar & ALT,
\n\tGandevi has rightly held that the respondent No.3 is entitled to the
\n\tpossession under Section 32(1-B) of the Bombay Tenancy Act and the
\n\tMamlatdar & ALT, Gandevi has rightly passed order directing the
\n\tpetitioners to hand over the possession back to the respondent No.3
\n\tand the same is rightly confirmed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal.\n<\/p>\n
For
\n\tthe reasons stated above, there is no substance in the present
\n\tSpecial Civil Application and the same is required to be dismissed
\n\tand is, accordingly, dismissed. Ad-interim relief, if any,  granted
\n\tearlier stands vacated.\n<\/p>\n
(M.R.Shah,
\nJ.)<\/p>\n
kdc.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Narendrabhai vs State on 23 August, 2010 Author: M.R. Shah,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/10655\/2005 10\/ 10 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10655 of 2005 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH ========================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may […]<\/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-262682","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nNarendrabhai vs State on 23 August, 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\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Narendrabhai vs State on 23 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-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=\"2010-08-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-02-24T23:14:02+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\\\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Narendrabhai vs State on 23 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-24T23:14:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1837,\"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\\\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010\",\"name\":\"Narendrabhai vs State on 23 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-02-24T23:14:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Narendrabhai vs State on 23 August, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Narendrabhai vs State on 23 August, 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\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Narendrabhai vs State on 23 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-02-24T23:14:02+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\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Narendrabhai vs State on 23 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-24T23:14:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010"},"wordCount":1837,"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\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010","name":"Narendrabhai vs State on 23 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-02-24T23:14:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/narendrabhai-vs-state-on-23-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Narendrabhai vs State on 23 August, 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:\/\/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\/262682","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=262682"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/262682\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=262682"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=262682"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=262682"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}