{"id":266269,"date":"2009-03-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009"},"modified":"2018-05-27T13:44:50","modified_gmt":"2018-05-27T08:14:50","slug":"gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Gigi vs Joseph Thomas on 16 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Kerala High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Gigi vs Joseph Thomas on 16 March, 2009<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCrl.Rev.Pet.No. 301 of 2002()\n\n\n1. GIGI, S\/O.JOSE, AGED 33,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. JOSEPH THOMAS, AGED 45, RESIDING AT\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.J.JOY\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.M.J.THOMAS\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT\n\n Dated :16\/03\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                              R.BASANT, J\n                      ------------------------------------\n                      Crl.R.P No.301 of 2002\n                      -------------------------------------\n              Dated this the 16th day of March, 2009\n\n                                  ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">     In this revision petition, the accused assails the concurrent<\/p>\n<p>verdict of guilty, conviction and sentence in a prosecution under<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"\/doc\/1823824\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 138<\/a> of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The petitioner<\/p>\n<p>now faces a sentence of S.I for a period of 6 months.                   No<\/p>\n<p>direction for payment of fine or compensation is issued.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">     2.    The prosecution relates to 2 cheques, each of<\/p>\n<p>Rs.40,000\/- issued by the accused to the complainant.<\/p>\n<p>Signatures in the cheques are admitted.                    The cheques when<\/p>\n<p>presented were dishonoured by the bank on the ground of<\/p>\n<p>insufficiency of funds.       Notice of demand Ext.P5 was duly<\/p>\n<p>despatched and acknowledged under Ext.P6. The same did not<\/p>\n<p>evoke any response.       It is, in these circumstances, that the<\/p>\n<p>complainant came to court with a complaint under <a href=\"\/doc\/1823824\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 138<\/a><\/p>\n<p>of the Negotiable Instruments Act observing the statutory time<\/p>\n<p>table scrupulously. The complainant examined himself as PW1<\/p>\n<p>and proved Exts.P1 to P11.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">     3.    In the course of cross examination the accused took<\/p>\n<p>up a contention that the cheques were issued not for the due<\/p>\n<p>discharge of a legally enforcible debt\/liability. It was contended<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">Crl.R.P No.301 of 2002          2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>that the cheques were stealthily obtained by the complainant<\/p>\n<p>from the accused on the promise that he shall make visa for<\/p>\n<p>employment abroad available to the accused. There was later a<\/p>\n<p>disagreement\/dispute between the accused and the complainant<\/p>\n<p>regarding construction of a road. On account of that animosity<\/p>\n<p>the cheques were being misutilised by the complainant to stake a<\/p>\n<p>false claim, it was contended.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">      4.    The courts below concurrently came to the conclusion<\/p>\n<p>that the complainant has succeeded in establishing all<\/p>\n<p>ingredients of the offence punishable under <a href=\"\/doc\/1823824\/\" id=\"a_2\">Section 138<\/a> of the<\/p>\n<p>N.I.Act.   Accordingly they proceeded to pass the impugned<\/p>\n<p>concurrent judgments.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">      5.    There is no representation for the revision petitioner.<\/p>\n<p>The learned counsel for the respondent has been heard. I have<\/p>\n<p>been taken through the impugned judgments.           I have gone<\/p>\n<p>through the Memorandum of Revision. The verdict of guilty and<\/p>\n<p>conviction are assailed on the ground that the cheques were not<\/p>\n<p>issued for the due discharge of any legally enforcible<\/p>\n<p>debt\/liability.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">      6.    The less said about this contention, the better.<\/p>\n<p>Signatures in Exts.P1 and P2 are not disputed. Handing over of<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_1\">Crl.R.P No.301 of 2002          3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>the cheques is also not disputed. We have the oral evidence of<\/p>\n<p>PW1 to explain the circumstance under which Exts.P1 and P2<\/p>\n<p>were received by the complainant.      The presumption under<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"\/doc\/268919\/\" id=\"a_3\">Section 139<\/a> of the Negotiable Instruments Act does also stare at<\/p>\n<p>the petitioner\/accused. The conduct of the accused of not<\/p>\n<p>responding to Ext.P5 notice corroborates the version of the<\/p>\n<p>complainant convincingly. Though a vague and general plea is<\/p>\n<p>raised that cheques were obtained for the purpose of securing<\/p>\n<p>employment abroad for the accused, there is nothing to<\/p>\n<p>substantiate such a plea. That suggestion thrown at PW1 when<\/p>\n<p>he was facing the cross examination is not even asserted by the<\/p>\n<p>accused in the 313 statement given by him.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">     7.   I do not, in these circumstances, find any merit in the<\/p>\n<p>challenge raised against the verdict of guilty and conviction<\/p>\n<p>under <a href=\"\/doc\/1823824\/\" id=\"a_4\">Section 138<\/a> of the Negotiable Instruments Act on merits.<\/p>\n<p>The challenge on merit must hence fail.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">     8.   There is a contention that the sentence imposed is<\/p>\n<p>excessive.   The prosecution is under <a href=\"\/doc\/1823824\/\" id=\"a_5\">Section 138<\/a> of the<\/p>\n<p>Negotiable Instruments Act. Cheques are for a total amount of<\/p>\n<p>Rs.80,000\/-. Cheques were issued as early as in 1996. I have<\/p>\n<p>already adverted to the principles governing imposition of<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_2\">Crl.R.P No.301 of 2002           4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>sentence in a prosecution under <a href=\"\/doc\/1823824\/\" id=\"a_6\">Section 138<\/a> of the N.I.Act in the<\/p>\n<p>decision in Anilkumar vs.Shammi [2002(3)KLT 852].           I am<\/p>\n<p>satisfied that leniency can be shown on the question of sentence<\/p>\n<p>after zealously ensuring that the complainant who has been<\/p>\n<p>compelled to fight three rounds of legal battle and wait from<\/p>\n<p>1996 is adequately compensated.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">      9.   In the result:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">      a)    This revision petition is allowed in part.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">      b)    The impugned verdict of guilty and conviction of the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner under <a href=\"\/doc\/1823824\/\" id=\"a_7\">Section 138<\/a> of the N.I.Act are upheld.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">      c)   But the sentence imposed is modified and reduced. In<\/p>\n<p>supersession of the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the<\/p>\n<p>courts below, he is sentenced to undergo imprisonment till rising<\/p>\n<p>of court. He is further directed under <a href=\"\/doc\/640437\/\" id=\"a_8\">Section 357(3)<\/a> Cr.P.C to<\/p>\n<p>pay an amount of Rs.1,00,000\/- (Rupees one lakh only) as<\/p>\n<p>compensation and in default, to undergo S.I for a period of three<\/p>\n<p>months. If realised, the entire amount shall be released to the<\/p>\n<p>complainant as compensation.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_12\">      10. The petitioner shall have time till 30\/04\/2009 to make<\/p>\n<p>the payment. The impugned sentence shall not be executed till<\/p>\n<p>that date.   The petitioner shall appear and his sureties shall<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\" id=\"span_3\">Crl.R.P No.301 of 2002         5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>produce him before the learned Magistrate on or before<\/p>\n<p>02\/05\/2009 to serve the modified sentence hereby imposed.<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_13\">                                         (R.BASANT, JUDGE)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Kerala High Court Gigi vs Joseph Thomas on 16 March, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 301 of 2002() 1. GIGI, S\/O.JOSE, AGED 33, &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. JOSEPH THOMAS, AGED 45, RESIDING AT &#8230; Respondent 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY For Petitioner :SRI.C.J.JOY For Respondent :SRI.M.J.THOMAS The Hon&#8217;ble MR. [&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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-266269","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Gigi vs Joseph Thomas on 16 March, 2009 - 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\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Gigi vs Joseph Thomas on 16 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-27T08:14:50+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Gigi vs Joseph Thomas on 16 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-27T08:14:50+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":807,\"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\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Gigi vs Joseph Thomas on 16 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-27T08:14:50+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Gigi vs Joseph Thomas on 16 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Gigi vs Joseph Thomas on 16 March, 2009 - 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\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Gigi vs Joseph Thomas on 16 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-27T08:14:50+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Gigi vs Joseph Thomas on 16 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-27T08:14:50+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009"},"wordCount":807,"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\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009","name":"Gigi vs Joseph Thomas on 16 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-27T08:14:50+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gigi-vs-joseph-thomas-on-16-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Gigi vs Joseph Thomas on 16 March, 2009"}]},{"@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\/266269","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=266269"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/266269\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=266269"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=266269"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=266269"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}