{"id":40480,"date":"2010-09-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010"},"modified":"2016-11-02T00:44:01","modified_gmt":"2016-11-01T19:14:01","slug":"smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"Smt. Fathima Tabsum W\/O Sayyed … vs State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Smt. Fathima Tabsum W\/O Sayyed … vs State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Ashok B.Hinchigeri<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE__.__\nDATED THIS THE 033\u00b0 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2010'if-~.._\u00b0-3--_\nBEFORE  V\n\nTHE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK B. HINC'HI?{3jjE.RI'~f: \n\nWRIT PETITION NO. 27684 of20I.0'A(jLBaELE)-..   7\n\nBETWEEN:\n\nSMT. FATHIMA TABSUM\nW\/O SAYYED AZMAL\n\nAGED ABOUT 32 YEARS .   '  L\n\nH NO. 1098, OPP. KALAMMA TE. PLE:_ 2;; ,\n\nCHANNAPATNA     \nRAMANAGAR DISTRICT  _   PETITIONER\n\n(BY SR1 JA'YA'}:<U'MA S IIRATIL; SE'NI'OR"A DVOCATE\nFOR 'M['S__JAY;iYKUMA_f2 _P'A_TII_:_ ASSOCIATES)\n\nAND:  ....    "\n\n1. STATE 'OF KAR[NiATf5'K:A   P. '\nDEPARTMENT OF URBAN 'DEV'\u00bbEi;OPMENT\nM S BUILDING, BANGALORE-\n\nREPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY\n\n2...~ . L_ DE PU*'IfYECOMMISS'ION.E.R'\n "CHACNNA"PATNA,._ RAMANAGAR DISTRICT\n\n3.  -ASST.' CCc5MM'IS.S.IONER\/RETURNING OFFICER\nRALM'NTAGA'R'.S.UB DIVISION \nRAMANAGAR \n\nfJj'_j44__'<..CHANNA,PATNA TOWN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL\n ' ,vCHANNAPATNA, REP BY COMMISSIONER\n\n_  RESHMA BANU\n '' W;?O SAYYED MAZAR KULMIRI\n  AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS\n UPPERDAIRA, CHANNAPATNA\nRAMNAGAR DISTRICT  RESPONDENTS<\/pre>\n
(BY SR1 R DEVDAS, AGA FOR R1 TO R3,
\nSR1 M R RAJAGOPAL, ADVOCATE FOR R5)<\/p>\n
THIS WRIT PETITION Is FILED UNDER ARTIcLEsgv..2.26V,A’r\u00e9’D’:27<\/p>\n
OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QL.iAs’i.—ATHE-ORD-E_Rs,
\nDATED 27.08.2010 AND DATED 27.08.2010 VIDE AN~NExeC..AND D1 <\/p>\n
RESPECTIVELY ISSUED BY R4 AND ETC.\n<\/p>\n
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FO:R..’RiRLYy.’:
\nTHE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: ‘  ‘   \u00ab. ”\n<\/p>\n
Q R D
\nThe petitioner has called _in._to ;q;restiio.n’;i the election of the
\nfifth respondent as._the vPresiclent_of’llithgigg\ufb01annapatna City<\/p>\n
Municipal Council.\n<\/p>\n
2. The..facts._VA.ol5’t:h\u00bbe  lln’—briei’ are that the Returning
\nOfficer iSSl.i\u20ac:d the Vcalefnda.ri”‘of_:xenjents on 16.8.2010 for electing<\/p>\n
the President and the V’iVce4Pr:\u00e9sident of the said local body. As<\/p>\n
per the..\u00ab\u00a73a’idi’*calendar_o_f_.a-vents, the filing of the nomination<\/p>\n
D-a_Dei;\u00a7,’theirvA_scrlijtiny, withdrawals and holding the elections, if<\/p>\n
 nece.ssary;  on 25.8.2010. The petitioner and the<\/p>\n
 fesponde’nt iil:o.S’ffiled their nomination forms for the office of the<\/p>\n
atPresideiitzofvlthe said local body. On scrutiny, their nomination<\/p>\n
papers were found to be valid. However while scrutinising the<\/p>\n
 non\ufb01nation of a 3″‘ candidate, namely, Smt,Asmatt Unnisa, the<\/p>\n
..W_OVh’eated discussions took place. In the ensuing scuffle~like<\/p>\n
H351<\/p>\n
situation, the two accepted nomination forms of the petitioner<\/p>\n
and the 5″‘ respondent were snatched by the local MLA.”-.H_e.fgga’ve<\/p>\n
them to Smt Asrnatt Unnisa. The said Asmatt;-\u00ab’_<\/p>\n
another councilor, Sri K.Basavaraj torethem .i’ntoi”pie;tes..’in the? <\/p>\n
presence of other counciliors. As the S:i’\u20acTlJai’fA_iAO’i’iV was_getti.ng’f_i’oijt’f*of<\/p>\n
control, the Returning Officer’f._’a-tijourn’ed  “hie-‘eting to”<\/p>\n
26.8.2010. In the meeting held go.nu:25.8….201.0}’the respondent<\/p>\n
No.5 was eiected unanimouslgtas’the~.’E?re’sirje,nt\u00bb\u00bb of the said CMC.<\/p>\n
3. Sri Jayaiktwar   Senior Counsel
\nappearing on   fs–uh:nits that if the Council
\nmeeting con=vene’d:’:for;\u00e9:th3e–  o_’f”electing a President is to be
\nadjourned,   to be resumed on the
\nadjourned gdatefiat  which they were interrupted on
\nthe.gvpre\\.ifgijdus__gAday.  notiin dispute that the petitioner’s<\/p>\n
no’mi’n.at’ienA ‘iorrn_’wa’s.scrutinized and found valid, the respondent<\/p>\n
 oug’ht to  taken her as one of the candidates in the<\/p>\n
_F.._election heidiogn the adjourned date of \/26.8.2010.<\/p>\n
“*x_4..,_Ti’ie learned Senior Counsel submits that the notice<\/p>\n
. ‘V:..’fi><'ifng__t:'rie meeting on 26.08.2010 was affixed on the door of the<\/p>\n
'petitioner's house at 11 O' clock late in the night on 25.8.2010.<\/p>\n
FISH.\n<\/p>\n
4<\/span>
\nHe submits that there was no need for the petitioner to fiie the<\/p>\n
nomination form once again. Without prejudice to this
\nsubmission, he contends that it wouid not have been possibie for
\nthe petitioner to fiie the nomination form because the-._\u00bbcaste<\/p>\n
certificate (showing that she belongs to BCA) is reVq.uire’d4′..’to’be<\/p>\n
produced aiongwith the nomination form.\n<\/p>\n
obtained from the concerned function’ary’v.ia_s”–,pr.odAi.i’c\u00abe_d:Von the i<\/p>\n
previous day and it was destroyed. If A:the:”petitio.ri_e.r”wereetocfiieu<\/p>\n
the nomination form not accompa-nied by the’caste’1.:ce’rtii\u00b0icate.<\/p>\n
her nomination form wouid have .~ijeen..’reVj’ected. A ‘That is why 10<\/p>\n
days’ notice for convening  for electing the<\/p>\n
President and Vice’ iiresidecntirisprescribed.<\/p>\n
5. Sri  the iearned counsei for the<\/p>\n
1..-res_vpon4:je\u00abntE Vsuubmits that the question of granting any<\/p>\n
in–teri,m” order=of.jstay wouid not arise in a case of this nature,<\/p>\n
  becaus.e’*the re–Spo.ndent No.5 has already assumed the charge as<\/p>\n
‘the Presidentofxthe CMC, Channapatna on 26.8.2010. The same<\/p>\n
 is{i_i’ni accordance with Ruie 14 of the Karnataka Municipaiities<\/p>\n
‘V”~i.___:(i5’resident and Vice~President) Election Rules, 1965. He brings<\/p>\n
 my notice, the interim prayer is for staying the<\/p>\n
 impiementation of the order, dated.27.8.201O and an further<\/p>\n
33%<\/p>\n
proceedings. According to him, the order, dated 27.8.2010 does<\/p>\n
not call for any implementation. It is already acted <\/p>\n
6. Sri Rajagopal has also raised a threshold:  <\/p>\n
maintainability of this petition. WhenfRiil’e’ \u00abI,,5’~\u00ab.of-:th:e’>Ka.rna’tai{2a<\/p>\n
Municipaiities (President and Vice–Pre.sid’e_nt) i\u00e9iectironnFiule’s’,.,<\/p>\n
1965 . s provides for the filing evlection. .,r;etitjoVnV before<\/p>\n
the District Judge, the petit\u00a7oner”i’s’iVhettjt.istirieti”‘in’i filing this
\npetition. On the short  _t.h:e.AA.’;ay’ailability of the
\naiternative remedy,i-ithiis pietitilori iisiiiilablveljto be rejected, so<\/p>\n
contends Sri Ra;?’a’go_pai’;”*!__ ,  <\/p>\n
7.   is not the case of the
\npetitioner she  of the adjourned date of
\nmeeting. ,.–Nowhere”i’nn7’thAe- memorandum of the writ petition,
\nthere isl”a.r\u00a7yi.-.a:.x;e’rrifient \u00abthatshe was not aware of the holding of<\/p>\n
the’ i–spe_ciai …n=ieetVii.rg:.1~~on 26.08.2010. As the petitioner was<\/p>\n
V7.::”~”avdmitted\u00ab.i,y no-t~ preisent on 26″‘, she has no locus standi to file<\/p>\n
v~.vrAit,petitio’n. If she had participated in the election process,<\/p>\n
*..4’*–.then’ .o’nl.y_f.she can have some grievance over the proceedings.<\/p>\n
 that out of 33 members of the local body, all the 14<\/p>\n
 ‘members belonging to the petitioner’s group were absent.<\/p>\n
3314.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
8. Sri R.Devdas, the learned Additional Government<\/p>\n
Advocate appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 subrnitgswgithat<\/p>\n
there are no averments whatsoever in the writ petition ‘:.to*w_is.y”=<\/p>\n
the petitioner is not preferring the election.peti’tiVon”a.nd.wh_y. she<\/p>\n
is filing the writ petition. He submits ;’t4hat..’_’asfV the <\/p>\n
not attended the Council meeting._:onV_  for”<\/p>\n
the purpose of eiecting thePresident,”vsheycannfotvvchaiilenge the
\nelection of the respondent”N’o,.–5,’–._a\u00a7;.”}:he’fi\u00e9rehsrident of the said<\/p>\n
CoundL<\/p>\n
9. If a  the President has to
\nbe put off   of the outbreak of
\nviolance,  be resumed from the stage at
\nwhich it was the propriety of the things, the
\nres~pondegri’t  ARetu’rrii’–n~g”Officer ought to have straight away<\/p>\n
proceeded.gto..,;co,ri<fuct the election. However, the respondent<\/p>\n
 issued a.fr.es_h.r:;ca\u00a5endar of events starting from the point of<\/p>\n
_\ufb02-..fi_l,i'r"ng_y the nomi;.nation forms. Alternatively, it was also open to<\/p>\n
5_'_'hi,m~~.lto:tVre*at and deciare that the petitioner and the respondent<\/p>\n
V' V.'j~:\\l.o'.'5 are already in the race, as their nomination forms were<\/p>\n
s,cru.tinized and found valid. If he had foreseen any difficulty in<\/p>\n
 decfaring so, he would have announced in the meeting held on<\/p>\n
6314.\n<\/p>\n
the original day (238.2010) that the nomination papers_.___are to<\/p>\n
be filed again.\n<\/p>\n
10. But then these are the desirabie courseisvjofvvactionu. V’<\/p>\n
The question is whether this Courtjshouid<\/p>\n
ground that the respondent No.3 oug’hth”to haxregopt’ed*;fovrV’Va\u00bb.g<\/p>\n
better course. If the petitioner”‘~\u00abwerre to’=b_e”-pjreswevntWon the<\/p>\n
adjourned day (26.8.2010)*i~n_\ufb02the=irrieeitingi-and insisted that she
\nbe permitted to contest  .AA.’ac_ceptance of the
\nnomination paper.  to re–file her
\nnomination form”  certificate, different issues
\nwould have.\u00bbfaiiengjfor;’:Eo’i1s:i’t>i’\u00a2TEiti’on”}””‘ the petitioner has not
\nchosen to   day and as it is not the
\npetitioner’s’casethat   aware of the adjourned date of
\n arn afra’i’d——–n’o relief can be given to the petitioner<\/p>\n
inVthesproce’e.d:i’ngs.:under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.<\/p>\n
 aiiegediy\u00e9.iin.pAiiied rejection of the petitioner’s nomination<\/p>\n
L.,.piape’r andfkthe alieged improper acceptance of the fifth<\/p>\n
‘._’_”‘resp.ondVe’n\u00abt’s nomination form are to be raised in a duly<\/p>\n
” ‘ffco’n’stituted eiection petition before the District Judge.<\/p>\n
HEM.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
11. In the result, I reject this petition keeping’.–all the<\/p>\n
contentions open and reserving the liberty to the petiVti’of”r;ervv.to<\/p>\n
avail of the remedy of filing the election petition.–:f::”Further”it_'”‘_iesh”<\/p>\n
made clear that the reasons given.herei\u00bbn…and.’_’the”o*aservaitions ‘<\/p>\n
made herein are only for the purpose <\/p>\n
petition. The District Judge oir\ufb01thge Election’ *ifribi1’n’a’l sjshaliw’<\/p>\n
adjudicate the election petition, if.\u00ab\u00ab–.tiled,”‘–~..igndepend.ently of the
\nreasons shown and the o’b’servatioin:sh.erein. If the
\nelection petition is \u00e9fiiecl   date of the
\nissuance of the___ of2.”tojday’sWVorder, the District
\nJudge\/Election__V”i’ri”bd:’iaaicshaljly’  of on merits without
\nraising the Zissu-e’ “giving this direction, I am
\nfortified by the\ufb01idgvmwengtdlthe\u00e9\u00e9l-ion’ble Supreme Court in the
\ncase org ” eAoANbA.1 1111 MRAJESHWARI v. BODAVULA<\/p>\n
I-l:’ia\\l_1Vl.lAl\\’v’i’.\u00a2\\Vl’:Yl-‘~’tiv\\jlAliAld.A4:.V’8.OTHERS, reported in AIR 1997 sc 1541.<\/p>\n
 The re!e’\\}a.nt” p’air.ag1raph of the said judgment is extracted<\/p>\n
v’.:*ghereinbelo”w:\n<\/p>\n
V.  ‘A .ri..4_.”3’.”‘The remedy is statutory remedy and
\n  lnnitation is one of the candidates to entertain
\nl  “election petition. By judicial order the limitation<\/p>\n
A. cannot be nulli\ufb01ed. In support thereof, he placed<\/p>\n
FISH<\/p>\n
‘Va<\/p>\n
9<\/span>
\nreliance on the judgment of this Court in Union of
\nIndia v. Kirloskar Pneumatic Co.Ltd.,<\/a> (1996) 4<\/p>\n
SCALE 317 : (1996 AIR SCW 2398). We find no<\/p>\n
force in his contention. It is not his case that
\nHigh Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain  ‘
\npetition against the election of a Sarpanch:”’andgt 9′  <\/p>\n
declaration of the result of:=.._the~~electionofif-a_ <\/p>\n
Sarpanch, etc. The High Court e\u00a7te_rci:=ing:’its.,;poVwei;-
\nunder Article 225 of the Constritution’ declined to
\ninterfere in the electifcin’ since alternative<\/p>\n
remedy of \ufb01ling election}petition”andiadjudication<\/p>\n
has ibieen pro’vi’ded,gg’ii:.:the relevant statutory rules.
\nFar from ”  the High Court has no<\/p>\n
jun”sdit:t”ion,  High Court exercised self restraint in<\/p>\n
t  -oifthe power under Article 226 and directed<\/p>\n
 r the  avail of alternative remedy. In this<\/p>\n
case,”‘*Vadrnittedly, the elections of Sarpanch was held<\/p>\n
 9’ and tesult was declared on June 24, 1995 and the
\n writ petition was filed on June .25, 1995. Power of<\/p>\n
H the Government on the process of electoral rolls was<\/p>\n
challenged in a batch of writ petitions. The writ\n<\/p>\n
-FISH.\n<\/p>\n
petition in question is also one of such writ petitions.<\/p>\n
Under the circumstances, the High Court though\u00abjit.i
\nexpedient that since elections were already  hi”.
\ndisputed questions of facts would.be._can#\/asst-:-d;  <\/p>\n
election petition as provided in :Rule_:A3′:ofihthe 7}’<\/p>\n
the High Court rightly deeiihea to”investigate””into:<\/p>\n
disputed question of the facts.uand’reAfused’ topgoii into<\/p>\n
the question relagatiii-gtp–the_’  .. pursue the<\/p>\n
remedy of election     the High
\nCourt has    the election
\npetition__.within ii;-‘2;ret.’  the date of disposal
\nof the writ’  directed the Tribunal
\nnot to into  of- limitation and instead<\/p>\n
decide the matter_ on merits. ”\n<\/p>\n
  “’12}’No=ord\u00e9r.:a_s; to costs.\n<\/p>\n
 bvr<\/p>\n
Edge<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Smt. Fathima Tabsum W\/O Sayyed … vs State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 2010 Author: Ashok B.Hinchigeri IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE__.__ DATED THIS THE 033\u00b0 DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2010’if-~.._\u00b0-3–_ BEFORE V THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK B. HINC’HI?{3jjE.RI’~f: WRIT PETITION NO. 27684 of20I.0’A(jLBaELE)-.. 7 BETWEEN: SMT. FATHIMA TABSUM […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-40480","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSmt. Fathima Tabsum W\/O Sayyed ... vs State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 2010 - 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-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Smt. Fathima Tabsum W\/O Sayyed ... vs State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-09-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-01T19:14:01+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=\"9 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-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Smt. Fathima Tabsum W\\\/O Sayyed … vs State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-01T19:14:01+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1786,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010\",\"name\":\"Smt. Fathima Tabsum W\\\/O Sayyed ... vs State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-01T19:14:01+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Smt. Fathima Tabsum W\\\/O Sayyed … vs State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 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":"Smt. Fathima Tabsum W\/O Sayyed ... vs State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 2010 - 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-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Smt. Fathima Tabsum W\/O Sayyed ... vs State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-01T19:14:01+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Smt. Fathima Tabsum W\/O Sayyed … vs State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-01T19:14:01+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010"},"wordCount":1786,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010","name":"Smt. Fathima Tabsum W\/O Sayyed ... vs State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-01T19:14:01+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/smt-fathima-tabsum-wo-sayyed-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-3-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Smt. Fathima Tabsum W\/O Sayyed … vs State Of Karnataka on 3 September, 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\/40480","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=40480"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40480\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=40480"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=40480"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=40480"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}