{"id":35433,"date":"2010-02-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010"},"modified":"2017-07-12T02:43:17","modified_gmt":"2017-07-11T21:13:17","slug":"state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"State vs Mukeshkumar on 8 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">State vs Mukeshkumar on 8 February, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/971\/2003\t 7\/ 7\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 971 of 2003\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nMUKESHKUMAR\nKURJIBHAI BHUT &amp; 2 - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nPK JANI, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR\nfor\nAppellant(s) : 1, \nMR TUSHAR L SHETH for Opponent(s) : 1 - 3. \nMR\nPB KHANDHERIA for Opponent(s) : 1 -\n3. \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 08\/02\/2010 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tpresent appeal, under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal<br \/>\n\tProcedure, 1973, is directed against the Judgment<br \/>\n\tand order of acquittal dated 12.05.2003 passed by the learned  2nd<br \/>\n\tJoint Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gondal, in Criminal Case No.<br \/>\n\t888 of 1995, whereby the learned Magistrate has acquitted the<br \/>\n\trespondents   accused from the charges alleged against them.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tshort facts of the prosecution case is that the complainant, Food<br \/>\n\tInspector visited the business place of the respondents &#8211; accused<br \/>\n\tand purchased the sample of  ground-nut oil from the oil mill of<br \/>\n\taccused for the purpose of analysis and after following the due<br \/>\n\tprocedure sent the same to the Public analyst, for analysis. In the<br \/>\n\tReport the Public Analyst found that the sample does not conform to<br \/>\n\tthe standards, as prescribed under the provisions of the Prevention<br \/>\n\tof Food Adulteration Act. Thereafter, on the basis of Report, after<br \/>\n\tobtaining necessary sanction the complainant filed complaint against<br \/>\n\tthe respondents   accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>Thereafter<br \/>\n\tthe trial was conducted before the learned Magistrate. The<br \/>\n\tprosecution has examined the witnesses and also relied upon the<br \/>\n\tdocumentary evidence. After considering the oral as well as<br \/>\n\tdocumentary evidence the learned Magistrate has acquitted the<br \/>\n\trespondents   accused from the charges alleged against them, vide<br \/>\n\tJudgment and order dated 12.05.2003.\n<\/p>\n<p>Being<br \/>\n\taggrieved and dissatisfied with the said Judgment and order dated<br \/>\n\t12.05.2003 passed by the learned Magistrate, in Criminal Case No.<br \/>\n\t888 of 1995, the appellant   State of Gujarat, has preferred the<br \/>\n\tabove mentioned Criminal Appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>I<br \/>\n\thave heard learned P.P., appearing on behalf of the appellant<br \/>\n\tState.  I  have also gone through the papers and the Judgment and<br \/>\n\torder passed by the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>Learned<br \/>\n\tPP  for the appellant has taken me through the evidence of<br \/>\n\tprosecution witnesses and the documentary evidence and submitted<br \/>\n\tthat from the above evidence it is established that the prosecution<br \/>\n\thas successfully proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. He has<br \/>\n\tcontended that there is no provision to serve the notice under<br \/>\n\tSection 13(2) to the accused within a period of 10 days, but what is<br \/>\n\trequired is that the notice under Section 13(2) should be issued to<br \/>\n\tthe accused within a period of 10 days and it is not required to be<br \/>\n\tserved on the accused within 10 days. He, therefore, contended that<br \/>\n\tthe Judgment and order passed by the learned Magistrate is without<br \/>\n\tappreciating the facts and evidence on record.\n<\/p>\n<p>I<br \/>\n\thave gone through the Judgment of the trial Court. I have also<br \/>\n\tperused the reasons assigned by the learned Magistrate.\n<\/p>\n<p>At<br \/>\n\tthe outset it is required to be noted that the principles which<br \/>\n\twould govern and regulate the hearing of appeal by<br \/>\n\tthis Court against an order of acquittal passed by the trial<br \/>\n\tCourt have been very succinctly explained by the Apex<br \/>\n\tCourt in a catena of decisions. In the case of<br \/>\n\tM.S. Narayana<br \/>\n\tMenon @ Mani Vs. State of Kerala &amp; Anr, reported in (2006)6 SCC,<br \/>\n\t39, the<br \/>\n\tApex Court has narrated about the powers of the High Court in appeal<br \/>\n\tagainst the<br \/>\n\torder of acquittal. In para 54 of the decision, the Apex Court has<br \/>\n\tobserved as under:\n<\/p>\n<p> 54.<br \/>\n\t In any event the High Court entertained an appeal treating to be an<br \/>\n\tappeal against acquittal, it was in fact exercising the revisional<br \/>\n\tjurisdiction. Even while exercising an appellate power against a<br \/>\n\tjudgement of acquittal, the High Court should have borne in mind the<br \/>\n\twell-settled principles of law that where two view are possible, the<br \/>\n\tappellate court should not interfere with the finding of acquittal<br \/>\n\trecorded by the court below.\n<\/p>\n<p>Thus,<br \/>\n\tit is a settled principle that while exercising appellate power,<br \/>\n\teven if two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the<br \/>\n\tevidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the<br \/>\n\tfinding  of acquittal recorded by the trial court.\n<\/p>\n<p>Even<br \/>\n\tin a recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/585040\/\">State<br \/>\n\tof Goa V. Sanjay Thakran &amp; Anr. Reported<\/a> in (2007)3 SCC 75,<br \/>\n\tthe  Court has reiterated the powers of the High Court in such<br \/>\n\tcases.\n<\/p>\n<p>Similar<br \/>\n\tprinciple has been laid down by the Apex  Court in the cases of<br \/>\n\tState of<br \/>\n\tUttar Pradesh Vs. Ram Veer Singh &amp; Ors, reported in 2007 AIR SCW<br \/>\n\t5553 and<br \/>\n\tin Girja<br \/>\n\tPrasad (Dead) by LRs Vs. state of MP, reported in 2007 AIR SCW 5589.<br \/>\n\tThus, the powers which<br \/>\n\tthis Court may exercise against an order of acquittal are well<br \/>\n\tsettled.\n<\/p>\n<p>It<br \/>\n\tis also a settled legal position that in acquittal appeal, the<br \/>\n\tappellate court is not required to re-write the judgment or to give<br \/>\n\tfresh reasoning, when the reasons assigned<br \/>\n\tby the Court below are found to be just and proper. Such principle<br \/>\n\tis laid down by the Apex Court in the  case of State<br \/>\n\tof Karnataka Vs. Hemareddy, reported in AIR 1981 SC 1417.\n<\/p>\n<p>Thus,<br \/>\n\tin case the  appellate court agrees with the reasons and the opinion<br \/>\n\tgiven by the lower court, then the discussion of evidence is not<br \/>\n\tnecessary.\n<\/p>\n<p>I<br \/>\n\thave gone through the judgment and order passed by the trial court.<br \/>\n\tI have also perused the oral as well as documentary evidence led<br \/>\n\tbefore the trial court and also considered the submissions made by<br \/>\n\tlearned Advocate for the appellant. It appears from the record that<br \/>\n\tthe prosecution has failed to follow the mandatory provisions of the<br \/>\n\tRules. When the mandatory provision of Rule is not followed by the<br \/>\n\tprosecution, then the prosecution has no right to say that the trial<br \/>\n\tCourt has committed an error in disbelieving the case of the<br \/>\n\tprosecution.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\ttrial court has, after appreciating the oral as well as documentary<br \/>\n\tevidence, has clearly observed that there is a breach of Section<br \/>\n\t13(2) as in the notice it is not mentioned as to in which Court the<br \/>\n\tcomplaint is filed and, therefore, the benefit should go to the<br \/>\n\taccused. The trial Court has also observed that as per Section 13(2)<br \/>\n\tthe notice should be served to the accused within t0 days and in the<br \/>\n\tpresent case the notices are issued long after 10 days.  The trial<br \/>\n\tCourt has found that from the evidence it is clearly established<br \/>\n\tthat the prosecution has failed to follow the mandatory provision of<br \/>\n\tRule 14 of Prevention of Food Adulteration of Rules.  The learned<br \/>\n\tMagistrate has also found that the story put-forward by the<br \/>\n\tprosecution is not believable. The trial Court has also found that<br \/>\n\tthere are serious lacunae in the oral as well as documentary<br \/>\n\tevidence of prosecution. Nothing is produced on record of this<br \/>\n\tappeal to rebut the concrete findings of the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>Thus,<br \/>\n\tthe appellant could not bring home the charge against<br \/>\n\tthe respondents   accused in the present Appeal. The prosecution<br \/>\n\thas miserably failed to prove the case against the appellant<br \/>\n\taccused.  Thus, from the evidence itself it is established that the<br \/>\n\tprosecution has not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.\n<\/p>\n<p>Learned<br \/>\n\tPP is not in a position to show any evidence to take a contrary view<br \/>\n\tin the matter or that the approach of the trial court is vitiated by<br \/>\n\tsome manifest illegality or that the decision is perverse or that<br \/>\n\tthe trial court has ignored the material evidence on record.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tabove view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that the<br \/>\n\ttrial court was completely justified in acquitting the respondents<br \/>\n\tof the charges leveled against them. I find that the findings<br \/>\n\trecorded by the trial court are absolutely just and proper and in<br \/>\n\trecording the said findings, no illegality or infirmity has been<br \/>\n\tcommitted by it.\n<\/p>\n<p>I<br \/>\n\tam, therefore, in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate<br \/>\n\tconclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the<br \/>\n\tcourt below and hence find no reasons to interfere with the same.<br \/>\n\tHence the appeal is hereby dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>In<br \/>\n\tview of above the Appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order dated<br \/>\n\t12.05.2003 passed by the learned Magistrate, in  Criminal Case No.<br \/>\n\t888 of 1995 acquitting the respondents &#8211; accused from the charges<br \/>\n\talleged against them is hereby confirmed. Bail bonds, if any, shall<br \/>\n\tstand cancelled.\tR &amp; P may be sent back to the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>(Z.K.SAIYED,<br \/>\nJ.)<\/p>\n<p>sas<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court State vs Mukeshkumar on 8 February, 2010 Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/971\/2003 7\/ 7 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 971 of 2003 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to [&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-35433","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 v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>State vs Mukeshkumar on 8 February, 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\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State vs Mukeshkumar on 8 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-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=\"2010-02-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-11T21:13:17+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State vs Mukeshkumar on 8 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-11T21:13:17+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1336,\"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\\\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010\",\"name\":\"State vs Mukeshkumar on 8 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-11T21:13:17+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State vs Mukeshkumar on 8 February, 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":"State vs Mukeshkumar on 8 February, 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\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State vs Mukeshkumar on 8 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-11T21:13:17+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State vs Mukeshkumar on 8 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-11T21:13:17+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010"},"wordCount":1336,"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\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010","name":"State vs Mukeshkumar on 8 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-11T21:13:17+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-mukeshkumar-on-8-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State vs Mukeshkumar on 8 February, 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\/35433","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=35433"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35433\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=35433"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=35433"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=35433"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}