{"id":33662,"date":"2011-08-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-08-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011"},"modified":"2018-06-06T05:42:09","modified_gmt":"2018-06-06T00:12:09","slug":"javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011","title":{"rendered":"Javed vs State on 3 August, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Javed vs State on 3 August, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Anant S. Dave,<\/div>\n<pre>  \n Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n    \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCR.A\/1852\/2011\t 6\/ 6\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1852 of 2011\n \n\n \n \n=========================================\n\n\n \n\nJAVED\nKHAN @ JAEED AZIZKHAN PATHAN - Applicant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT &amp; 2 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n========================================= \nAppearance\n: \nMS. KHUSHI M PANDYA for\nApplicant(s) : 1, \nMS MANISHA L SHAH ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for\nRespondent(s) : 1, \nNone for Respondent(s) : 2 -\n3. \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 ANANT S. DAVE\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 03\/08\/2011 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>1.\tThis<br \/>\npetition under Articles 14, 21 and 226 of the Constitution of India<br \/>\nwith Sections 268 and 269 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and<br \/>\nunder Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 is preferred<br \/>\nby the petitioner, who is convicted by the Special Court on 21st<br \/>\nOctober, 2002 for the offences punishable under Section 302, 120 of<br \/>\nIndian Penal Code and under Sections 25(1)(c) and 27 of Arms Act and<br \/>\nunder Section 5 of TADA.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tIt<br \/>\nis the case of the petitioner that from the date of arrest i.e. from<br \/>\n14th September, 1992, except for a period of 11 days of<br \/>\ntemporary bail granted by the Apex Court for his marriage, the<br \/>\npetitioner is not given any benefit of furlough and\/or parole and<br \/>\noverall jail record of the petitioner is good as per the statement<br \/>\ndated 21.7.2011 furnished by Dy. Superintendent, Ahmedabad Central<br \/>\nJail except remarks that the petitioner is under the order of<br \/>\nrestriction imposed by Section 268(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure<br \/>\nand that he is the real brother of absconded accused and undergoing<br \/>\nlife imprisonment being a member of a gang of notorious criminal.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tMr.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mukul Sinha, for Ms. Khushi Pandya, learned advocate for the<br \/>\npetitioner submits that by this time even as per the record of the<br \/>\njail authority the petitioner has remained in jail for about 18 years<br \/>\nand 9 months and 26 days and barring 11 days of temporary bail<br \/>\ngranted by the Apex Court for his marriage no other relief is given<br \/>\nto the petitioner as provided under Prisons (Bombay Furlough and<br \/>\nParole) Rules, 1959.  It is further stated that ordinarily remission<br \/>\ngranted to other accused on similar conviction for life imprisonment,<br \/>\nthe petitioner is deprived of such relief or remission only on the<br \/>\nground that he happened to be the real brother of notorious absconder<br \/>\nand sharpshooter Sharif Khan who happened to be a member of a gang of<br \/>\nsimilarly situated co-accused.  It is further submitted that so far<br \/>\nas apprehension shown by the State Government and Prison authorities<br \/>\nabout likelihood of escape or absconding, wife of the petitioner and<br \/>\nbrother of the wife of the petitioner are ready and willing to be the<br \/>\nsurety and stringent conditions be imposed so as to see that no such<br \/>\napprehension result into reality and interest of the society can be<br \/>\nprotected.  Besides, it is submitted that the jail record of the<br \/>\npetitioner even do not reveal any breach or violation of any of the<br \/>\nprovisions of conduct by the prisoner as provided in a Jail Manual<br \/>\nand not even a minor punishment is inflicted for all these 18 years<br \/>\n10 months and, the petitioner cannot be permitted or allowed to<br \/>\nsuffer due to criminal record of his relative. In the month of holy<br \/>\n&#8216;Ramzan&#8217; the applicant has to undertake some religious rituals for<br \/>\nwhich he would like to reside at his own residence along with his<br \/>\nfamily members.  It is further submitted that the authority concerned<br \/>\nhas not taken into consideration many other aspects as required to be<br \/>\nlooked into while deciding the application for furlough and by<br \/>\nimposing suitable conditions the petitioner be granted furlough.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tMs.\n<\/p>\n<p>Manisha L. Shah, learned APP for the respondent-State has vehemently<br \/>\nopposed grant of furlough to the petitioner on the ground that the<br \/>\nintelligence report received by the authority would reveal that if<br \/>\nthe petitioner is granted furlough, in all probability the petitioner<br \/>\nwould abscond and in the past attempts were made by his brother to<br \/>\nget him released from the jail.  Even restrictions have been imposed<br \/>\nby the authority under Section 268(1) of Cr.P.C. and the petitioner<br \/>\nis kept in a high security zone at Central Jail, Sabarmati,<br \/>\nAhmedabad, so that no untoward incident take place.  The authority<br \/>\nhas taken a  conscious decision on the basis of material available<br \/>\nabout likelihood of committing breach of conditions of furlough even<br \/>\nif he is granted by this Court, keeping in mind the past record and<br \/>\nconviction of the petitioner and his likelihood of indulging in<br \/>\nsimilar activities jeopradising pubic interest that would desist this<br \/>\nCourt from exercising powers of grant of furlough in favour of the<br \/>\npetitioner.  Learned APP has also relied on various annexures along<br \/>\nwith affidavit which would go to show that communication from Dy.<br \/>\nCommission of Police, Zone-IV, Ahmedabad City addressed to Additional<br \/>\nDirector General and Inspector General of Police about adverse<br \/>\nopinion in case if the petitioner is granted furlough along with the<br \/>\nabove a list of offence is registered in the year 1992 against<br \/>\nbrother of the petitioner is also annexed.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.1.\tIn<br \/>\naddition to above, learned APP has also relied on the order dated<br \/>\n23.4.2009 passed in Special Criminal Application No. 151 of 2009<br \/>\n(Coram: Hon&#8217;ble Smt. Justice Abhilasha Kumari) by which request to<br \/>\ngrant furlough came to be rejected by reasoned order.  However, in<br \/>\nreview application filed by the petitioner, on 6.11.2009 liberty was<br \/>\nreserved to the petitioner to prefer an application for grant of<br \/>\nfurlough.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tHaving<br \/>\nheard learned advocate for the petitioner and learned APP, following<br \/>\naspects remained uncontroverted that pursuant to registration of FIR<br \/>\nbeing C.R. No.254 of 1992, the petitioner came to be arrested on<br \/>\n14.9.1992.  The conviction was recorded on 21.10.2002 by the<br \/>\ndesignated Court.  By this time the petitioner has remained in jail<br \/>\nfor around 18 years and 10 months including imprisonment as under<br \/>\ntrial and during the period of imprisonment as above barring 11 days<br \/>\nfrom 29th April, 2008 to 9.3.2008, when the petitioner<br \/>\ncame to be enlarged by the Apex Court on temporary bail for his<br \/>\nmarriage at no occasion he has moved out of prison either on furlough<br \/>\nor parole or temporary bail.   During the period of imprisonment no<br \/>\nincident appeared about breach of any provisions of the jail manual<br \/>\nor norms of conduct of a prisoner and remarks pertaining to jail<br \/>\nrecord of the petitioner reveal good.  Lastly Article 21 of the<br \/>\nConstitution of India confers right to life and personal liberty is<br \/>\napplicable even to a prisoner who is a citizen of India subject to<br \/>\ncertain restrictions as per procedure established by law.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.1.\tThe<br \/>\napprehension of the authority about likelihood of escape of the<br \/>\npetitioner can be taken care by imposing appropriate conditions, when<br \/>\nwife of the petitioner and brother of the wife of the petitioner has<br \/>\nshown willingness in no uncertain terms to be surety of the<br \/>\npetitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.2.\tThe<br \/>\nDivision Bench of this Court in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1229442\/\">Govindbhai Mansinh<br \/>\nDabhi &amp; Ors. v. State of Gujarat<\/a> [2005 (3) GLH 169] while<br \/>\nconsidering Prisons (Bombay Furlough &amp; Parole) Rules, 1959 in the<br \/>\ncontext of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 after<br \/>\nconsidering decision of the Full Bench in the case of Bhikhabhai<br \/>\nDevshi v. State of Gujarat &amp; Ors. [AIR 1987 Gujarat 136] and<br \/>\nanother decision of Division Bench in the case of Sharad Bhiku<br \/>\nMarchande v. State of Maharashtra [1991 Criminal Law Journal 2109]<br \/>\nand in para 16 observed and held as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;16.\n<\/p>\n<p>The aims and objects of framing of the Furlough Rules and the legal<br \/>\nposition that the furlough is a substantial and legal right of the<br \/>\nprisoner and the legislative intent by enacting Section 428 of the<br \/>\nCr.P.C. providing the period of detention undergone by the accused to<br \/>\nbe set-off against the sentence of imprisonment, we are of the firm<br \/>\nview that the words actual imprisonment undergone mean and include<br \/>\nthe period of detention undergone by the accused as an under-trial<br \/>\nprisoner.  By interpreting the words actual imprisonment undergone in<br \/>\nsuch manner, the purpose and object of grant of furlough are<br \/>\nachieved.  As observed above, furlough is claimed by a prisoner as a<br \/>\nright and the purpose is that, he should not continue to remain in<br \/>\njail for a longer period.  If the argument of the Assistant<br \/>\nGovernment Pleader that actual imprisonment undergone would only mean<br \/>\nactual imprisonment undergone after the sentence and the prisoner<br \/>\ncannot be given benefit of detention or imprisonment as an under<br \/>\ntrial prisoner is accepted, then the prisoner\/convict would have to<br \/>\nremain in jail for a much longer period before he can be entitled to<br \/>\nfurlough.  Criminal jurisprudence demands that graver the offence,<br \/>\nlarger the punishment and larger the punishment, more the set-off,<br \/>\nremission and grant of furlough.  After all punishment is not<br \/>\nretributory, but reformatory and a prisoner should be permitted grant<br \/>\nof furlough after he has been sentenced to imprisonment  by including<br \/>\nthe detention or imprisonment he has suffered as under trial<br \/>\nprisoner.  That advances the cause of justice, objective of Furlough<br \/>\nRules and in conformity and in consonance with the right of liberty<br \/>\nprovided under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tThus,<br \/>\nwhat is held in the case of  Bhikhabhai Devshi (supra) by<br \/>\nthe Full Bench and in case of  Govindbhai Mansinh Dabhi<br \/>\n(supra)  by the Division Bench,<br \/>\nI am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for grant<br \/>\nof furlough for a period of atleast two weeks by imposing suitable<br \/>\nconditions as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>6.1.\tThe<br \/>\npetitioner who is in jail since around 18 years and 10 months is<br \/>\ngranted furlough for a period of two weeks from the date of his<br \/>\nrelease on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000\/- with two<br \/>\nsureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the jail authority<br \/>\nwith an additional condition about marking his presence every day<br \/>\nbefore the Dariapur Police Station, Ahmedabad and shall not leave the<br \/>\njurisdiction of Dariapur Police Station without permission of the<br \/>\nauthority till completion of period of furlough and on completion of<br \/>\nthe above period the petitioner shall report to the jail authority in<br \/>\ntime.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tRule<br \/>\nis made absolute to the above extent.  Direct service is permitted.\n<\/p>\n<p>[ANANT<br \/>\nS. DAVE, J.]<\/p>\n<p>\/\/smita\/\/<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Javed vs State on 3 August, 2011 Author: Anant S. Dave, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCR.A\/1852\/2011 6\/ 6 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 1852 of 2011 ========================================= JAVED KHAN @ JAEED AZIZKHAN PATHAN &#8211; Applicant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT &amp; 2 [&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":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-33662","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Javed vs State on 3 August, 2011 - 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\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Javed vs State on 3 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-08-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-06T00:12:09+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\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Javed vs State on 3 August, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-06T00:12:09+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1583,\"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\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011\",\"name\":\"Javed vs State on 3 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-06T00:12:09+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Javed vs State on 3 August, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Javed vs State on 3 August, 2011 - 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\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Javed vs State on 3 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-08-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-06T00:12:09+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\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Javed vs State on 3 August, 2011","datePublished":"2011-08-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-06T00:12:09+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011"},"wordCount":1583,"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\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011","name":"Javed vs State on 3 August, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-08-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-06T00:12:09+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/javed-vs-state-on-3-august-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Javed vs State on 3 August, 2011"}]},{"@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\/33662","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=33662"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33662\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=33662"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=33662"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=33662"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}