{"id":272260,"date":"2010-08-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010"},"modified":"2018-02-08T00:57:59","modified_gmt":"2018-02-07T19:27:59","slug":"arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"Arjunan vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 2 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Arjunan vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 2 August, 2010<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 02\/08\/2010\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA\n\nCriminal Original Petition(MD) No.8292 of 2010\n\n\nArjunan\t\t\t\t\t.. Petitioner\n\nvs\n\nThe State of Tamilnadu\nRep. by the Inspector of Police,\nKarungal Police Station,\nKanyakumari District.\t\t\t.. Respondent\n\n\nPrayer\n\nCriminal Original Petition filed under <a href=\"\/doc\/1679850\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 482<\/a> of Cr.P.C. to allow\nthe criminal original petition and set aside the order passed in Copy\nApplication No.4195 of 2010 on the file of the Principal District Munsif cum\nJudicial Magistrate, Eraniel dated 30.06.2010.\n\n!For petitioner\t  ... Mr.C.K.M.Appaji\n^For Respondents  ... Mr.S.Muthu Venkatesan,\n\t\t      G.A.,(Crl.Side)\n\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">\tThe petitioner approaches this Court with a prayer to to allow the<br \/>\ncriminal original petition and set aside the order passed in Copy Application<br \/>\nNo.4195 of 2010 on the file of the Principal District Munsif cum Judicial<br \/>\nMagistrate, Eraniel dated 30.06.2010.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">\t2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the<br \/>\npetitioner is running a Homeopathy Medical stores in the name and style of<br \/>\nS.A.Medical having licence TNK\/37\/20C and TNK\/32\/20D and on 17.06.2010, the<br \/>\nrespondent police preferred an application before the Principal District Munsif<br \/>\ncum Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel, seeking permission to search the petitioner&#8217;s<br \/>\nshop alleging that the petitioner has sold illegal medicine and the learned<br \/>\nJudicial Magistrate has also granted permission to search the premises of the<br \/>\npetitioner.  When the petitioner came to know about the said search order, he<br \/>\nfiled a copy application in C.A.No.4195 of 2010 to furnish the copy of the<br \/>\nsearch order dated 17.06.2010, the learned Judicial Magistrate returned the same<br \/>\nwith the following endorsement:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">\t&#8220;As per the circular issued by the Hon&#8217;ble High Court in ROC proceedings<br \/>\nNo.1823\/A\/2010 F1 P.Dis.No.50\/2010 dated 20.04.2010 with reference to the (1)<br \/>\norders of the Hon&#8217;ble High Court in Crl.O.P.No.5317 of 2010 against crime No.149<br \/>\nof 2010 dated 17.03.2010 (2) orders of the High Court in 1988 L.W.(Crl.) 503<br \/>\nSelvanathan alias <a href=\"\/doc\/1491189\/\" id=\"a_1\">Raghavan V. State<\/a> by Inspector of Police, certified copies are<br \/>\nnot to be given during investigation.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present application to furnish<br \/>\nthe copy of the search order dated 17.06.2010 passed by the learned Judicial<br \/>\nMagistrate.  To substantiate his case, the learned counsel appearing for the<br \/>\npetitioner relied upon the decision in 2009(1) MWN (Cr.) 298 (<a href=\"\/doc\/1092175\/\" id=\"a_2\">Rev.Samuel<br \/>\nD.Stephens and others V. Pastor A.Samuel Ramasamy<\/a>) and submit that as per<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/48925\/\" id=\"a_3\">Section 363(5)<\/a> of Cr.P.C. Any person affected by order passed by Court, on<br \/>\nApplication and payment of charges, entitled to copy of such order or of any<br \/>\ndeposition or other part of record and thus, he prayed for the allowing of the<br \/>\npetition.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">\t3.The learned Government Advocate (criminal side) would submit that as per<br \/>\nthe circular of this Court, the petitioner is not entitled to get the copy of<br \/>\nsearch order and he prayed for the dismissal of the application.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">\t4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the<br \/>\nlearned Government Advocate (Criminal side) and perused the entire materials<br \/>\navailable on record.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">\t5.The petitioner is the owner of S.A.Medical shop and the respondent has<br \/>\nsuspected that the petitioner is selling illegal contraband medicines, he filed<br \/>\na search petition before the learned Judicial Magistrate for searching the<br \/>\npremises of the petitioner and the learned Judicial Magistrate has also passed<br \/>\nthe search order dated 17.06.2010 and hence, the petitioner has filed a copy<br \/>\napplication in C.A.No.4195 of 2010 to furnish the copy of the said search order<br \/>\ndated 17.06.2010, which was returned stating that as per the circular of this<br \/>\nCourt, the petitioner is not entitled for the same.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">\t6. The ROC proceedings of this Court No.1823\/A\/2010 F1 P.Dis.No.50\/2010<br \/>\ndated 20.04.2010 has been issued only on the basis of the judgment rendered in<br \/>\n1988 L.W.(Crl.) 503 Selvanathan alias <a href=\"\/doc\/1491189\/\" id=\"a_4\">Raghavan V. State<\/a> by Inspector of Police.<br \/>\nAt this juncture, it is appropriate to consider the decision relied upon by the<br \/>\nlearned counsel appearing for the petitioner reported in 2009(1) MWN (Cr.) 298<br \/>\n(<a href=\"\/doc\/1092175\/\" id=\"a_5\">Rev.Samuel D.Stephens and others V. Pastor A.Samuel Ramasamy<\/a>), wherein, the<br \/>\nlearned Judge has also considered the above said decision in 1988 L.W.(Crl.) 503<br \/>\nSelvanathan alias <a href=\"\/doc\/1491189\/\" id=\"a_6\">Raghavan V. State<\/a> by Inspector of Police and ordered for<br \/>\nfurnishing the copy of documents.  While perusing the judgment cited in the<br \/>\nabove said R.O.C. in Selvanathan alias <a href=\"\/doc\/1491189\/\" id=\"a_7\">Raghavan V. State<\/a> by Inspector of Police<br \/>\nreported in 1988 L.W.(Crl.) 503, wherein in paragraph No.64, it has been held as<br \/>\nfollows:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">\t&#8220;A careful analysis of these provisions shows that the affidavit of the<br \/>\npolice officer demanding police custody of the accused is based on any<br \/>\ninformation received by him during the course of the investigation, which<br \/>\ninformation needs further probe.  The Magistrate before ordering police custody<br \/>\nhas to satisfy himself not only by perusing the contents of the affidavit, but<br \/>\nalso the entries in the case diary on the basis of which the affidavits are to<br \/>\nbe sworn to by the police officers.  Hence the affidavit drawn in accordance<br \/>\nwith Rule 76 of the Criminal rules of Practice without any extraneous material,<br \/>\ncannot be said to be a &#8216;record&#8217; within the meaning of S.363(5)<a href=\"\/doc\/445276\/\" id=\"a_8\"> of the Code<\/a><br \/>\nbefore the stage of passing any order thereon.  So, till an order is passed by<br \/>\nthe Magistrate, there is no right whatsoever for the accused to get a copy of<br \/>\nthe affidavit.  But, once an order is passed on the basis of the affidavit filed<br \/>\nby the police officer the said affidavit becomes a part of the record.  It may<br \/>\nbe pointed out in this connection that there is no specific legal embargo under<br \/>\nS.172(3)<a href=\"\/doc\/445276\/\" id=\"a_9\"> of the Code<\/a> disentitling the accused to get a copy of such affidavit<br \/>\nwhich does not form part of the case diary.  Needless to say that the police<br \/>\nofficer swearing to such affidavit should be extra cautious in drafting the<br \/>\naffidavit with the particulars only necessary for that purpose.  In view of this<br \/>\nlegal position, we hold that after an order is passed by the Magistrate on the<br \/>\nbasis of the said affidavit the accused will be entitled to get a copy of the<br \/>\nsame as well as the order passed thereon, on application and on payment of the<br \/>\nprescribed charges.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_9\">\t7. Hence, as per the said decision, the petitioner is  entitled the copy<br \/>\nof search order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate.  Furthermore, it was<br \/>\nfollowed by the decision reported in 2009(1) MWN (Cr.) 298 (<a href=\"\/doc\/1092175\/\" id=\"a_10\">Rev.Samuel<br \/>\nD.Stephens and others V. Pastor A.Samuel Ramasamy<\/a>), wherein, in paragraph No.20,<br \/>\nit has been held as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_10\">\t&#8220;Similarly, in a Criminal case taken cognizance on the basis of the<br \/>\nPrivate Complaint also if the allegations contained in the Complaint and the<br \/>\ndocuments accompanied with the Complaint do not accompanied with the Complaint<br \/>\ndo not prima facie reveal the commission of any offence and the ingredients of<br \/>\nthe offence are not made out, it is always open to the accused to approach the<br \/>\nHigh Court under <a href=\"\/doc\/1679850\/\" id=\"a_11\">Section 482<\/a>, <a href=\"\/doc\/445276\/\" id=\"a_12\">Cr.P.C<\/a>. seeking for quashing of the proceedings.<br \/>\nFor taking recourse under <a href=\"\/doc\/1679850\/\" id=\"a_13\">Section 482<\/a> Cr.P.C. it is necessary for the accused to<br \/>\nproduce before the Court a copy of the Complaint as well as the documents filed<br \/>\nalong with the Complaint.  Since before taking cognizance, the learned Judicial<br \/>\nMagistrate is bound to apply his judicial mind not only to the allegations<br \/>\ncontained in the Complaint but also to the documents accompanying the same and<br \/>\nan order taking cognizance is a judicial order and as such the accused is<br \/>\nentitled to challenge the cognizance taken in the case.  As per <a href=\"\/doc\/48925\/\" id=\"a_14\">Section 363(5)<\/a><br \/>\nCr.P.C., save as otherwise provided in sub-section (2) any person affected by an<br \/>\norder passed by the Court on an Application made in this behalf and on payment<br \/>\nof the prescribed charges be given a copy of such order or of any deposition or<br \/>\nother part of the record.  If the question is considered in the light of <a href=\"\/doc\/48925\/\" id=\"a_15\">Section<br \/>\n363(5)<\/a> Cr.P.C., it could be held that since, as pointed out above, an order<br \/>\ntaking cognizance is a judicial order, <a href=\"\/doc\/48925\/\" id=\"a_16\">Section 363(5)<\/a> is attracted and on that<br \/>\nground also the accused is entitled to get a copy of the part of the record of a<br \/>\nCriminal case to enable him to seek appropriate remedy before the higher forum.<br \/>\nIn my considered view, Rule 339 of the Criminal Rules of Practice is in<br \/>\nconsonance with the provisions contained in <a href=\"\/doc\/48925\/\" id=\"a_17\">Section 363(5)<\/a> , <a href=\"\/doc\/445276\/\" id=\"a_18\">Cr.P.C<\/a>.  It is also<br \/>\nto be pointed out that by furnishing of certified copies of the documents filed<br \/>\nalong with the Private Complaint, no prejudice whatsoever is going to be caused<br \/>\nto the complainant, whereas, if the request of the accused is rejected, it will<br \/>\ndefinitely prejudice the right of the accused in seeking appropriate legal<br \/>\nremedy before the higher Courts.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_11\">\t8.It is appropriate to consider the <a href=\"\/doc\/1227984\/\" id=\"a_19\">Section 74<\/a> of the Indian Evidence Act,<br \/>\nwhich reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_12\">\t&#8220;74.Public documents. &#8211; The following documents are public documents:-<br \/>\n\t(1)documents forming the acts, or records of the acts-\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_13\">\t\t(i) of the Sovereign authority,\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_14\">\t\t(ii) of the bodies and tribunals, and\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_15\">\t\t(iii) of public officers, legislative,<br \/>\n                      judicial and executive, of any part of<br \/>\n                      India or of the Commonwealth or of a foreign<br \/>\n                      country,<\/p>\n<p>\t(2)Public records kept in any State of private documents.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_16\">As per the above said provision and as per the dictum laid down in both the<br \/>\nabove said decisions, since the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate<br \/>\nis a public document, the petitioner is entitled to get the order copy.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_17\">R.MALA,J.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_18\">Arul\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_19\">\t9. Considering the same, I am of the opinion, the petitioner is entitled<br \/>\nto get the copy of the search order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate<br \/>\nand the petition is liable to be allowed.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_20\">\t10. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is allowed and the<br \/>\nlearned Judicial Magistrate, Eraniel is directed to entertain the copy<br \/>\napplication filed by the petitioner and furnish the copy of the search order<br \/>\ndated 17.06.2010 after following due process of law.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_21\">arul<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_22\">1.The Inspector of Police,<br \/>\n  Karungal Police Station,<br \/>\n  Kanyakumari District.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_23\">2.The Judicial Magistrate,<br \/>\n  Eraniel.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_24\">3.Additional Public Prosecutor,<br \/>\n  Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,<br \/>\n  Madurai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Arjunan vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 2 August, 2010 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02\/08\/2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA Criminal Original Petition(MD) No.8292 of 2010 Arjunan .. Petitioner vs The State of Tamilnadu Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Karungal Police Station, Kanyakumari District. .. Respondent [&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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-272260","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Arjunan vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 2 August, 2010 - 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\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Arjunan vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 2 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-02-07T19:27:59+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Arjunan vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 2 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-07T19:27:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1591,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010\",\"name\":\"Arjunan vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 2 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-07T19:27:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Arjunan vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 2 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":"Arjunan vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 2 August, 2010 - 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\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Arjunan vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 2 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-02-07T19:27:59+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Arjunan vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 2 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-07T19:27:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010"},"wordCount":1591,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010","name":"Arjunan vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 2 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-07T19:27:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arjunan-vs-the-state-of-tamilnadu-on-2-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Arjunan vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 2 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\/272260","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=272260"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/272260\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=272260"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=272260"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=272260"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}