{"id":268984,"date":"2006-05-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-05-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006"},"modified":"2017-09-19T08:58:03","modified_gmt":"2017-09-19T03:28:03","slug":"nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006","title":{"rendered":"Nayani Narasimha Reddy vs Dr. K. Laxman &amp; Others on 5 May, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Nayani Narasimha Reddy vs Dr. K. Laxman &amp; Others on 5 May, 2006<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: P Balasubramanyan<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: P.K. Balasubramanyan<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil)  2475 of 2006\n\nPETITIONER:\nNayani Narasimha Reddy\n\nRESPONDENT:\nDr. K. Laxman &amp; Others\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 05\/05\/2006\n\nBENCH:\nP.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">J U D G M E N T<br \/>\n(Arising out of SLP(C) No.6785 of 2005)<\/p>\n<p>P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN, J.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">1.\t\tI respectfully agree with the reasoning and<br \/>\nconclusion in the judgment just pronounced by my<br \/>\nlearned brother.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">2.\t\t<a href=\"\/doc\/100326451\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 94<\/a> of the Representation of the People<br \/>\nAct, 1951 (for short, the Act) provides that a voter in an<br \/>\nelection, when summoned as a witness in an election<br \/>\npetition, cannot be compelled to disclose for whom he<br \/>\nhas voted.  The words, &#8220;shall be required&#8221; place a bar on<br \/>\nany such compulsion.  The Court, as of right or by<br \/>\nauthority, cannot compel the voter summoned as a<br \/>\nwitness, to disclose his preference.  The sub-heading to<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/100326451\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 94<\/a> of the Act indicates that the bar is intended<br \/>\nto preserve the secrecy of the ballot.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">3.\t\tThe rule against testimonial compulsion, in a<br \/>\ncase governed by <a href=\"\/doc\/100326451\/\" id=\"a_2\">Section 94<\/a> of the Act, will have to be<br \/>\napproached from two angles.  The initial question is<br \/>\nwhether the witness would have to incriminate himself<br \/>\nwhile giving evidence.  The privilege against self-<br \/>\nincrimination in the words of Lord Goddard L.J. is that:<br \/>\n&#8220;No one is bound to answer any question<br \/>\nin civil or criminal proceedings if the<br \/>\nanswer thereto would in the opinion of the<br \/>\njudge have a tendency to expose the<br \/>\ndeponent to any criminal charge, penalty<br \/>\nor forfeiture which the judge regards as<br \/>\nreasonably likely to be preferred or sued<br \/>\nfor&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">(See Blunt v. Park Lane Hotel (1942) 2 K.B. 253 at<br \/>\npage 257)\t<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">4.\t\tThe privilege against self-incrimination is to be<br \/>\nclaimed by the witness.  The right becomes available<br \/>\nonly after the witness has taken the stand and a<br \/>\nquestion that offends the privilege is put to him.  A<br \/>\nprospective witness or some other person (as in the<br \/>\npresent case) cannot raise such an issue in anticipation<br \/>\nof an apprehended breach of privilege against self-<br \/>\nincrimination.  Phipson referring to a number of<br \/>\nauthorities on the point states:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">&#8220;It may be taken by the witness in<br \/>\nrefusing to answer a question; the witness<br \/>\ncannot refuse to go into the witness box:<br \/>\nhe can only claim privilege after he has<br \/>\ngone into the witness box and been sworn<br \/>\nand the question put.  The court must<br \/>\ndetermine from the circumstances of the<br \/>\ncase and the nature of the evidence the<br \/>\nwitness is called to give whether there are<br \/>\ngrounds for the privilege being invoked<br \/>\nand grounds to &#8220;apprehend danger.&#8221;  The<br \/>\nmere fact that a party swears that his<br \/>\nanswer would tend to criminate him is not<br \/>\nconclusive.  Once the danger is made<br \/>\napparent great latitude should be allowed<br \/>\nto a witness asked questions in giving<br \/>\nevidence in judging for himself of the effect<br \/>\nof any particular question.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">The privilege must, unlike other<br \/>\nforms of privilege, be claimed on oath by<br \/>\nthe person asserting it on his own behalf,<br \/>\nnot his solicitor.  Nevertheless, it might be<br \/>\nnecessary for evidence to be led from<br \/>\nothers to support the claim.  It is not<br \/>\nnecessary to explain precisely why the<br \/>\nevidence would incriminate, as that might<br \/>\nundermine the privilege.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">[Phipson on Evidence, 15th Edn., page<br \/>\n564]<\/p>\n<p>It is clear that <a href=\"\/doc\/100326451\/\" id=\"a_3\">Section 94<\/a> of the Act only confers a<br \/>\nprivilege on the witness and that he would be at liberty<br \/>\nto waive it and give evidence on his electoral preference.<br \/>\nThe argument based on <a href=\"\/doc\/100326451\/\" id=\"a_4\">Section 94<\/a>, at the instance of<br \/>\nthe appellant, on the ground of a perceived threat of<br \/>\nself-incrimination of the prospective witness, is<br \/>\nmisconceived.  The appellant cannot thrust the privilege<br \/>\nunder <a href=\"\/doc\/100326451\/\" id=\"a_5\">Section 94<\/a> of the Act on the prospective witness.<br \/>\nThe appellant cannot deprive the witness of the right to<br \/>\ntake his own decision in the matter as and when he<br \/>\ntakes the witness stand and a question on his electoral<br \/>\npreference is put to him.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">5.\t\tThe second question is whether, the evidence<br \/>\nof the witness would breach the secrecy of the election<br \/>\nprocess.  It has been held by this Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/556135\/\" id=\"a_6\">S. Raghbir<br \/>\nSingh Gill v. S. Gurcharan Singh Tohra and others<\/a><br \/>\n[(1980) Supp. SCC 53] and <a href=\"\/doc\/192550\/\" id=\"a_7\">A. Neelalohithadasan Nadar<br \/>\nv. George Mascrene and others<\/a> [(1994) Supp. (2) SCC<br \/>\n619] that the purity of the election process is more<br \/>\nimportant than the privilege conferred by <a href=\"\/doc\/100326451\/\" id=\"a_8\">Section 94<\/a> of<br \/>\nthe Act.  This Court has recognized that the secrecy of<br \/>\nvoting could be breached to subserve a larger public<br \/>\ngood, namely, to prevent a fraud on the election process.<br \/>\nMy learned brother has dealt with this aspect and I am<br \/>\nin agreement with him.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">6.\t\tIn the present case, we must also note two<br \/>\nincidental aspects that stand in the way of accepting the<br \/>\nplea of the appellant.  The arguments based on <a href=\"\/doc\/100326451\/\" id=\"a_9\">Section<br \/>\n94<\/a> of the Act are not being raised by the prospective<br \/>\nwitness but by a third person.  The stage at which the<br \/>\nplea is raised i.e. even before the witness has actually<br \/>\ntaken the witness stand is also significant.  The<br \/>\nappellant cannot seek to prevent the witness from taking<br \/>\nthe stand.  He cannot also seek to curb the power of the<br \/>\nCourt to summon the witness.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">7.\t\tIn the above situation, neither the privilege<br \/>\nagainst self-incrimination nor the secrecy of the election<br \/>\nprocess stand in the way of a voter being summoned as<br \/>\na witness in an election petition.  The power of the Court<br \/>\nunder Order XIV of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, on<br \/>\napplication by the parties or suo moto to summon any<br \/>\nperson for his attendance in Court and its power to<br \/>\nsummon any person to produce any document remains<br \/>\nunaffected by <a href=\"\/doc\/100326451\/\" id=\"a_10\">Section 94<\/a> of the Act.  The power of the<br \/>\nCourt to summon a witness is one thing, the privilege of<br \/>\na witness not to answer a question put to him is<br \/>\nanother.   The witness would be free to claim privilege<br \/>\nunder <a href=\"\/doc\/100326451\/\" id=\"a_11\">Section 94<\/a> of the Act and can refuse to reveal for<br \/>\nwhom he has voted.  However, if he is willing to disclose<br \/>\nhis electoral preference he is entitled to do so.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_12\">8.\t\tHence, I too would dismiss the appeal.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Nayani Narasimha Reddy vs Dr. K. Laxman &amp; Others on 5 May, 2006 Author: P Balasubramanyan Bench: P.K. Balasubramanyan CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 2475 of 2006 PETITIONER: Nayani Narasimha Reddy RESPONDENT: Dr. K. Laxman &amp; Others DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05\/05\/2006 BENCH: P.K. BALASUBRAMANYAN JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-268984","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Nayani Narasimha Reddy vs Dr. K. Laxman &amp; Others on 5 May, 2006 - 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\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Nayani Narasimha Reddy vs Dr. K. Laxman &amp; Others on 5 May, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006\" \/>\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=\"2006-05-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-19T03:28:03+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Nayani Narasimha Reddy vs Dr. K. Laxman &amp; Others on 5 May, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-05-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-19T03:28:03+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006\"},\"wordCount\":1004,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006\",\"name\":\"Nayani Narasimha Reddy vs Dr. K. Laxman &amp; Others on 5 May, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-05-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-19T03:28:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Nayani Narasimha Reddy vs Dr. K. Laxman &amp; Others on 5 May, 2006\"}]},{\"@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":"Nayani Narasimha Reddy vs Dr. K. Laxman &amp; Others on 5 May, 2006 - 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\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Nayani Narasimha Reddy vs Dr. K. Laxman &amp; Others on 5 May, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-05-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-19T03:28:03+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Nayani Narasimha Reddy vs Dr. K. Laxman &amp; Others on 5 May, 2006","datePublished":"2006-05-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-19T03:28:03+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006"},"wordCount":1004,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006","name":"Nayani Narasimha Reddy vs Dr. K. Laxman &amp; Others on 5 May, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-05-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-19T03:28:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nayani-narasimha-reddy-vs-dr-k-laxman-others-on-5-may-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Nayani Narasimha Reddy vs Dr. K. Laxman &amp; Others on 5 May, 2006"}]},{"@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\/268984","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=268984"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/268984\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=268984"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=268984"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=268984"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}