{"id":35495,"date":"2006-11-27T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-11-26T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006"},"modified":"2014-06-15T01:08:56","modified_gmt":"2014-06-14T19:38:56","slug":"smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006","title":{"rendered":"Smt.Nabeesa vs The State Of Kerala on 27 November, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Smt.Nabeesa vs The State Of Kerala on 27 November, 2006<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C) No. 18291 of 2004(C)\n\n\n1. SMT.NABEESA, W\/O.A.KARIM, AGED 41\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE DIRECTOR, CENTRAL BUREAU OF\n\n3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,\n\n4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.X.VARGHESE\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.S.SREEKUMAR, SC FOR CBI\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT\n\n Dated :27\/11\/2006\n\n O R D E R\n                                   R.BASANT, J.\n\n                          ------------------------------------\n\n                          W.P.C.NO.18291 OF 2004\n\n                          ------------------------------------\n\n                 Dated this the 27th ,day of November, 2006.\n\n\n                                    JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
       The   petitioner   is   the   mother   of   a   12   year   old   girl,   who   was<\/p>\n
murdered and her  body was found abandoned stuffed in a gunny bag<\/p>\n
on   21.07.1997.     Investigation   was   conducted   by   the   police.     The<\/p>\n
petitioner  had  occasion to  come  to this Court  complaining about  the<\/p>\n
allegedly   inadequate  investigation.    That  petition was  disposed of  by<\/p>\n
order dt.1.6.1999 in O.P.2818 of 1998 by this Court, a copy of which<\/p>\n
is   produced   as   Ext.P1.     At   that   stage,   it   was   reported   that<\/p>\n
investigation   is   complete   and   a   charge   sheet\/final   report   has   been<\/p>\n
filed against two accused persons.   The 2nd  accused who was charge<\/p>\n
sheeted   is   none   other   than   the   husband   of   the   petitioner   herein,   ie.<\/p>\n
the father of the child, who was murdered.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       2.     The   petitioner   appears   to   have   accepted   Ext.P1   order.<\/p>\n
The   order   was   not   challenged.     Though   at   the   Bar   it   was   submitted<\/p>\n
earlier   that   Ext.P1   order   was   challenged   in   writ   appeal   before   this<\/p>\n
Court, it is submitted now that there has been no such challenge.   In<\/p>\n
short, the petitioner appears  to have  accepted Ext.P1.   It shows that<\/p>\n
after   investigation,   the   petitioner’s   husband   himself   was   arrayed   as<\/p>\n
the  2nd  accused  along  with  another  with  whom  he  is  alleged  to  have<\/p>\n
shared the common intention to commit the murder of his daughter.<\/p>\n
W.P.C.NO.18291 OF 2004                     2<\/span><\/p>\n
       3.     The   further   proceedings   continued   and   the   petitioner’s<\/p>\n
husband   along   with   the   co-accused   faced   trial   before   the   learned<\/p>\n
Additional   Sessions   Judge   (Fast   Track   –   I),   Palakkad.     In   that<\/p>\n
prosecution,   PWs   1   to   29   were   examined   and   Exts.P1   to   P23   were<\/p>\n
proved.    M.Os  1   to  13  were  also  marked.    No   defence evidence  was<\/p>\n
adduced.   The learned Sessions Judge by Ext.P2 judgment found that<\/p>\n
the prosecution has not succeeded in proving the guilt of either of the<\/p>\n
two  accused.     Accordingly,   the   learned   Sessions   Judge   proceeded   to<\/p>\n
pass the judgment dated 16.11.2002 in Sessions Case No.246 of 1998,<\/p>\n
a copy of which is produced as Ext.P2, in this Writ Petition.<\/p>\n
       4.     The petitioner has come to this Court again.   What is her<\/p>\n
grievance  ?     The   learned  counsel   for   the   petitioner   submits   that   the<\/p>\n
petitioner,   the   mother   of   the   victim\/child   is   anguished   that   the<\/p>\n
mystery relating to the murder of her child remains unresolved even<\/p>\n
now.   The counsel urges that the petitioner has a right to know what<\/p>\n
had happened to her child.   The counsel submits that the absence of<\/p>\n
an   efficient   and   proper   investigation   has   led   to   the   petitioner   being<\/p>\n
left in the lurch unable to know how her minor child had met with her<\/p>\n
death.  The counsel submits that the petitioner has again come before<\/p>\n
this Court only because a proper investigation was not conducted.  All<\/p>\n
the   crucial   witnesses   had   turned   hostile   in   the   trial   before   the<\/p>\n
Sessions Court.   They did not support the prosecution case at all.   At<\/p>\n
W.P.C.NO.18291 OF 2004                       3<\/span><\/p>\n
the end of the day, there was only the  semblance of an evidence that<\/p>\n
blood of the same group as that of her deceased child was available in<\/p>\n
the   bathroom   of   the   1st  accused.     The   prosecution   was   not   able   to<\/p>\n
place   any   better   evidence.     Witnesses   including   the   petitioner   had<\/p>\n
turned   hostile.     The   learned   counsel   for   the   petitioner   submits   that<\/p>\n
according to the petitioner, it is not a case of the witnesses speaking<\/p>\n
falsehood before the court below.   It is a case where proper and true<\/p>\n
investigation was not conducted.  In these circumstances, it is prayed<\/p>\n
that   further   investigation   may   be   ordered   to   be  conducted  and   such<\/p>\n
further   investigation   may   be   entrusted   to   the   Central   Bureau   of<\/p>\n
Investigation.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       5.      The   learned   Stand   Counsel   for   the   C.B.I   opposes   the<\/p>\n
prayer.  He submits that the prayer is unknown to law.   Investigation<\/p>\n
was   conducted   earlier.     The   final   report   has   been   filed.     Even   the<\/p>\n
petitioner appears to have accepted the final report  in as much as she<\/p>\n
did   not   choose   to   challenge   Ext.P1   order.     The   mere   fact   that   the<\/p>\n
witnesses   turned   hostile   to   the   prosecution   and   the   court   could   not<\/p>\n
resolve   the   mystery   of   the   crime   is   no   reason   at   all   to   direct   any<\/p>\n
further   investigation.     It   cannot   be   the   law   that   until   conviction   is<\/p>\n
secured, further trial and investigation should continue.  The prayer is<\/p>\n
misconstrued, submits the learned Stand Counsel for the C.B.I.<\/p>\n
W.P.C.NO.18291 OF 2004                        4<\/span><\/p>\n
       6.      The   learned   counsel   for   the   petitioner   places   reliance   on<\/p>\n
the   decision   in  Zahira   Habibulla   H.Sheikh   v.   State   of   Gujarat<\/a><\/p>\n
[(2004)   4   Supreme   Court   Cases   158]   (known   popularly   as   the   Best<\/p>\n
Bakery case) and various further decisions in the same case reported<\/p>\n
in   (2005)   4   SCC   292   &   (2006)   3   SCC   374.     He   contends   that   in   an<\/p>\n
appropriate case, the hands of this Court are not tied and if this Court<\/p>\n
is convinced   that a proper investigation has not been conducted and<\/p>\n
a  proper  trial  had not not been held, it is  open to court  to direct re-<\/p>\n
trial and reinvestigation also.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
       7.      I am in agreement with the learned Standing Counsel for<\/p>\n
the   C.B.I.     It   is   now   trite   that   the   dictum   in   the   Best   Bakery   case<\/p>\n
cannot   be   applied   mechanically   in   all   other   situations.     That   was<\/p>\n
indeed   an   exceptional   case   where   the   Supreme   Court   felt   that   a<\/p>\n
mockery of justice by a farcical trial.  In these circumstances the said<\/p>\n
dictum   in   the   Best   Bakery   Case   cannot   be   imported   to   the   factual<\/p>\n
situation   in   other   cases   unless   they   are   comparable.     The   Supreme<\/p>\n
Court made this clear in a subsequent decision in  Satyajit Banerjee<\/p>\n
v. State of W.B  [2005(1)  SCC 115].   The learned Judges in para.26<\/p>\n
have made the following observations.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
              “The   law   laid   down   in   Best   Bakery   case   in   the<\/p>\n
       aforesaid   extraordinary   circumstances,   cannot   be   applied<\/p>\n
       to   all   cases   against   the   established   principles   of   criminal<\/p>\n
       jurisprudence.   Direction for retrial should not be made in<\/p>\n
       all or every case where acquittal of accused is for want of<\/p>\n
       adequate   or   reliable   evidence.     In   Best   Bakery   case,   the<\/p>\n
W.P.C.NO.18291 OF 2004                      5<\/span><\/p>\n
        first trial was found to be afarce and is described as “mock<\/p>\n
        trial”.   Therefore the direction for retrial was in fact, for a<\/p>\n
        real   trial.     Such   extraordinary   situation   alone   can   justify<\/p>\n
        the directions as made by this Court in Best Bakery case.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
        8.     In   this   case,   investigation   was   conducted   by   the   police.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
Final   report   had   been   filed.     It   would   appear   from   the   judgment<\/p>\n
Ext.P2 that the court could not come to any safe conclusion because<\/p>\n
there   was   hostility   on   the   part   of   witnesses   including   the   petioner<\/p>\n
herein.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
        9.     I   am   certainly   not  satisfied  that   the  situation   available   in<\/p>\n
this case is in any way comparable to the situation in the Best Bakery<\/p>\n
case.     I   am   certainly   not   persuaded   to   invoke   the   powers   under<\/p>\n
Section   482   Cr.P.C   to   direct   retrial   or   reinvestigation   in   this   case.<\/p>\n
Unfortunate though it be that the murderers of the young child could<\/p>\n
not be brought to book, this certainly is not a case where the powers<\/p>\n
under Section 482 Cr.P.C can or ought to be invoked to direct a fresh<\/p>\n
investigation and trial.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
        10.    This Writ Petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed.<\/p>\n
                                                                    R.BASANT<\/p>\n
                                                                       JUDGE<\/p>\n
rtr\/<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Smt.Nabeesa vs The State Of Kerala on 27 November, 2006 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C) No. 18291 of 2004(C) 1. SMT.NABEESA, W\/O.A.KARIM, AGED 41 … Petitioner Vs 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE … Respondent 2. THE DIRECTOR, CENTRAL BUREAU OF 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-35495","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSmt.Nabeesa vs The State Of Kerala on 27 November, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt.Nabeesa vs The State Of Kerala on 27 November, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2006-11-26T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-06-14T19:38:56+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt.Nabeesa vs The State Of Kerala on 27 November, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-11-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-14T19:38:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006\"},\"wordCount\":1175,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006\",\"name\":\"Smt.Nabeesa vs The State Of Kerala on 27 November, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-11-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-06-14T19:38:56+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt.Nabeesa vs The State Of Kerala on 27 November, 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":"Smt.Nabeesa vs The State Of Kerala on 27 November, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & 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\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt.Nabeesa vs The State Of Kerala on 27 November, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-11-26T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-06-14T19:38:56+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt.Nabeesa vs The State Of Kerala on 27 November, 2006","datePublished":"2006-11-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-14T19:38:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006"},"wordCount":1175,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006","name":"Smt.Nabeesa vs The State Of Kerala on 27 November, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-11-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-06-14T19:38:56+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nabeesa-vs-the-state-of-kerala-on-27-november-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt.Nabeesa vs The State Of Kerala on 27 November, 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\/35495","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=35495"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/35495\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=35495"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=35495"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=35495"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}