{"id":39287,"date":"2009-08-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-08-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009"},"modified":"2018-12-22T23:19:57","modified_gmt":"2018-12-22T17:49:57","slug":"smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009","title":{"rendered":"Smt Nilofar Siraj Darbar vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court<\/div>\n
Smt Nilofar Siraj Darbar vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 2009<\/div>\n
Bench: Bilal Nazki, A. R. Joshi<\/div>\n
                                            1\n\n\n\n              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY\n\n\n\n\n                                                                           \n                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION\n\n\n\n\n                                                   \n                   CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No. 587 OF 2009\n\n\n\n\n                                                  \n          Smt Nilofar Siraj Darbar,\n          age 41 years, Flat No.401,\n          4th Floor, Amina Mansion,\n          95, Memonwada Road,\n\n\n\n\n                                    \n          Opposite Noor Hospital,\n          Mandvi, Mumbai - 400 003.\n                        ig                       ..Petitioner\n\n\n                 vs.\n                      \n     1.   State of Maharashtra\n          Through the Additional Chief\n          Secretary to the Government of\n      \n\n          Maharashtra, Home Department\n          (Special), Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032.\n   \n\n\n\n     2.   Smt. Anna Dani, Principal\n          Secretary (Appeals & Security),\n          Government of Maharashtra\n\n\n\n\n\n          Home Department and\n          Detaining Authority, Home\n          Department (Special),\n          Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400 032.\n\n     3.   The Superintendent, Nashik\n\n\n\n\n\n          Central Road Prison, Nashik.\n\n                                         ..Respondents.\n\n                                         WITH\n\n                  CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No. 588 OF 2009\n\n\n\n\n                                                   ::: Downloaded on - 09\/06\/2013 14:54:38 :::\n                                               2\n\n\n            Shri Faizan Khalil Abrahani,\n            age 24 years, an Indian\n\n\n\n\n                                                                              \n            inhabitant, residing at 3rd floor,\n            17, Memon Wada Road, Jhaveri\n            Building, Mandvi, Mumbai 400 003.\n\n\n\n\n                                                      \n                                                         ..Petitioner.\n\n     vs.\n\n\n\n\n                                                     \n     1.     State of Maharashtra\n            Through the Additional Chief\n            Secretary to the Government of\n            Maharashtra, Home Department\n            (Special), Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032.\n\n\n\n\n                                        \n     2.     Smt. Anna Dani, Principal\n                       \n            Secretary (Appeals & Security),\n            Government of Maharashtra\n            Home Department and\n                      \n            Detaining Authority, Home\n            Department (Special),\n            Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400 032.\n\n     3.     The Superintendent, Nashik\n      \n\n            Central Road Prison, Nashik.\n                                                   ..Respondents.\n   \n\n\n\n     Shri Shibandas Banarjee, Senior Advocate with Faisal Farooq i\/b Shubail Farooq\n     with Shri U.N. Tripathi for the petitioners.\n\n\n\n\n\n     Mrs A.S. A.P.P. for the State.\n\n                                           CORAM: BILAL NAZKI\n                                                  AND A.R.JOSHI,JJ\n\n                                           DATED : 17TH AUGUST,2009\n\n\n\n\n\n     JUDGMENT (Per Bilal Nazki,J)\n<\/pre>\n
     1.             Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioners as well as the learned<\/p>\n
     Additional Public Prosecutor.\n<\/p>\n
     2.             These two writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of<\/p>\n
                                                      ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:54:38 :::<\/span>
\n                                              3<\/span><\/p>\n
     India filed by the petitioner Smt Nilofar Darbar, the wife of Siraj Yusuf Darbar,<\/p>\n
     who is detenue in W.P. No.587\/2009 and the the petitioner Faizan Khalil son of<\/p>\n
     Khalil Mohammed Hussain Abrahani who is detenue in W.P. No.588\/2009, are<\/p>\n
     being disposed of by a common judgment, as both of them involve common<\/p>\n
     questions of law and facts. The impugned orders of detention were passed by the<\/p>\n
     Principal Secretary (Appeals & Security), Government of Maharashtra, Home<\/p>\n
     Department and Detaining Authority, Home Department (Special), Mantralaya,<\/p>\n
     Mumbai (hereinafter referred as “detaining authority”) on 12.1.2009 in respect of<\/p>\n
     both the detenues on the same day vide Section 3 (1) of the Conservation of<\/p>\n
     Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter<\/p>\n
     referred to as “the COFEPOSA Act”) and the detenues were ordered to surrender<\/p>\n
     with a view to prevent them in future from smuggling goods. The detenues<\/p>\n
     surrendered in view of the orders of detention on 16.2.2009 and according to the<\/p>\n
     petitioners the grounds of detention were served on the detenues after fifth day of<\/p>\n
     the orders of detention.\n<\/p>\n
     3.             The necessary facts which may be mentioned, as furnished for the<\/p>\n
     grounds of detention, are that Officers of Mumbai Zonal Unit of Directorate of<\/p>\n
     Revenue    Intelligence (D.R.I.) had collected an intelligence to the effect that<\/p>\n
     certain importers were indulging in imports of assorted electronic goods by grossly<\/p>\n
     undervaluing them. This under valuation of import consignments had resulted in<\/p>\n
     evasion of customs duty to the tune of crores of rupees thereby causing huge loss<\/p>\n
     to the State Exchequer. These two detenues were in connection with this<\/p>\n
     intelligence inputs they were arrested on 4.5.2008 and subsequently released on<\/p>\n
     bail. Thereafter, the orders of detention came to be passed. These orders of<\/p>\n
                                                     ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:54:38 :::<\/span>
\n                                                 4<\/span><\/p>\n
     detention have been challenged mainly on the following grounds;\n<\/p>\n
     4.               The grounds of detention when served did not have documents<\/p>\n
     along with them and they were served after fifth day.\n<\/p>\n
     5.               It has been submitted by the learned Senior Advocate appearing for<\/p>\n
     the detenues that the detenues were in detention till 21.2.2009 and thereafter the<\/p>\n
     grounds of detention were served on them. The second ground of attack on the<\/p>\n
     orders of detention is that the documents served on the detenues are in languages<\/p>\n
     which were not known to them. Many documents were in Gujrati, Marathi and<\/p>\n
     English and detenues knew no other language than Urdu. They did not have<\/p>\n
     enough knowledge of English and knew only Urdu. The third ground of attack is<\/p>\n
     most of the documents supplied and relied upon by the detaining authority were<\/p>\n
     not legible documents. It is further contended that documents relied upon by the<\/p>\n
     detaining authority were not supplied and on the other hand irrelevant documents<\/p>\n
     were supplied.\n<\/p>\n
     6.               We will deal with the arguments relating to supply of the documents<\/p>\n
     which were not legible. In the first instance, the learned Senior Counsel appearing<\/p>\n
     for the petitioners submits that the documents were served on the detenues after<\/p>\n
     the orders of detention was passed. Some of these documents bear the certificate<\/p>\n
     to the following effect:-\n<\/p>\n
                      ” The document is not legible”.\n<\/p>\n
     7.               It is signed by the Senior Intelligence Officer, D.R.I. Mumbai.It<\/p>\n
     may be pointed out that this objection has been taken in the writ petitions, as well;\n<\/p>\n
     and in reply the learned detaining authority has taken a plea that these documents,<\/p>\n
                                                        ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:54:38 :::<\/span>
\n                                               5<\/span><\/p>\n
     which were illegible were not, in fact, material documents and were not taken into<\/p>\n
     consideration at the time when the orders of detention were passed. This cannot be<\/p>\n
     accepted for two reasons. The detaining authority in writ petition No.588\/2009 in<\/p>\n
     counter affidavit, while referring to the documents which were not legible, said<\/p>\n
     that the documents at page Nos. 2161, 2164 are the copies of packing list of goods<\/p>\n
     imported in the name of M\/s Shruti Impex and Milan Traders recovered under the<\/p>\n
     panchnama dated 3-5-2008. The document at page No.2162 is the fax copy of the<\/p>\n
     items imported. The said documents have passing reference and are not vital for<\/p>\n
     issuing the orders of detention against the detenues. The documents at page Nos.\n<\/p>\n
     2169, 2177, 2178, 2182, 2183, 2184, 2215 2155 and 2217 are the copies of fax<\/p>\n
     containing details of goods imported which was recovered under the panchnama<\/p>\n
     dated 3.5.2008. The whole case for detaining detenues under the COFEPOSA Act<\/p>\n
     was on allegation against them that they were importing goods and these<\/p>\n
     documents pertain to such imports and if the detaining authority did not take such<\/p>\n
     documents into consideration one fails to understand as to what material was<\/p>\n
     before her to reach the conclusion that persons needed to be detained. In fact these<\/p>\n
     are the documents which are relevant.\n<\/p>\n
     8.            The second reason for not accepting the contention of the detaining<\/p>\n
     authority is her assertion in paragraph No.44 of grounds of detention as under:-\n<\/p>\n
            “while passing the detention order under the COFEPOSA Act,             1974     I
\n            have   referred to   and relied upon the documents mentioned in the
\n            enclosed list which are also being served on you”.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                                      ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:54:38 :::<\/span>
\n                                               6<\/span><\/p>\n
     9.            Therefore, we have no doubt that the documents which are not<\/p>\n
     legible were taken into consideration by the detaining authority while arriving at<\/p>\n
     subjective satisfaction to detain the detenues. When the learned Senior Counsel for<\/p>\n
     the petitioners pointed out that most of the documents were not legible, on the last<\/p>\n
     occasion, the learned A.P.P., who wanted to be fair to the detaining authority<\/p>\n
     sought time to get the instructions and today she has reported that these documents<\/p>\n
     were not legible even when they were seen by the detaining authority.                She<\/p>\n
     clarified that this statement was being made by her on instructions by the<\/p>\n
     Sponsoring Authority. This statement of the learned A.P.P., means that neither<\/p>\n
     Sponsoring Authority nor the detaining authgority had any occasion to read the<\/p>\n
     documents on which finally detaining authority relied. This makes the case worst.\n<\/p>\n
     The orders of detention cannot be passed at mere asking of a police officer or by a<\/p>\n
     sponsoring authority. The orders of detention have to be passed by the detaining<\/p>\n
     authority after examining the material and after coming to subjective satisfaction<\/p>\n
     that the person needs to be detained. Time and again, this Court has impressed<\/p>\n
     upon the detaining authorities to discharge their duties in accordance with<\/p>\n
     Constitutional mandate. But we have seen that neither Constitutional mandate is<\/p>\n
     taken care of nor even care is taken to read the judgments of this Court. On this<\/p>\n
     ground alone, the orders of detention can be quashed, though there are other<\/p>\n
     grounds taken by the petitioners but we feel that they are not necessary to be gone<\/p>\n
     into.\n<\/p>\n
     10.           For the aforesaid reasons, both writ petitions are allowed. The<\/p>\n
     orders of detention passed by the detaining authority are set aside and quashed.\n<\/p>\n
                                                      ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:54:38 :::<\/span>
\n                                               7<\/span><\/p>\n
     Rule made absolute in both the petitions accordingly in terms of prayer clause (a).\n<\/p>\n
     The detenues be released forhwith, if not required in any other case. Writ petitions<\/p>\n
     are disposed of accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
                                                             (BILAL NAZKI,J)<\/p>\n
                                                                (A.R.JOSHI,J)<\/p>\n
                                                      ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:54:38 :::<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court Smt Nilofar Siraj Darbar vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 2009 Bench: Bilal Nazki, A. R. Joshi 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION No. 587 OF 2009 Smt Nilofar Siraj Darbar, age 41 years, Flat No.401, 4th Floor, Amina Mansion, 95, Memonwada […]<\/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":[11,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-39287","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSmt Nilofar Siraj Darbar vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 2009 - 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-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt Nilofar Siraj Darbar vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-08-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-12-22T17:49:57+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\\\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt Nilofar Siraj Darbar vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-22T17:49:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1211,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Bombay High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009\",\"name\":\"Smt Nilofar Siraj Darbar vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-22T17:49:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt Nilofar Siraj Darbar vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 2009\"}]},{\"@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 Nilofar Siraj Darbar vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 2009 - 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-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt Nilofar Siraj Darbar vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-08-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-12-22T17:49:57+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\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt Nilofar Siraj Darbar vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 2009","datePublished":"2009-08-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-22T17:49:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009"},"wordCount":1211,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Bombay High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009","name":"Smt Nilofar Siraj Darbar vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-22T17:49:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-nilofar-siraj-darbar-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-17-august-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt Nilofar Siraj Darbar vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 2009"}]},{"@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\/39287","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=39287"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39287\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=39287"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=39287"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=39287"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}