{"id":49897,"date":"2010-03-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-03-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010"},"modified":"2018-12-31T03:29:46","modified_gmt":"2018-12-30T21:59:46","slug":"state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010","title":{"rendered":"State vs The on 3 March, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">State vs The on 3 March, 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\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/975\/1996\t 1\/ 9\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. 975 of 1996\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\nHIMATSINH\nBADJIBHAI PARGI - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nRC KODEKAR, LD. ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR\nfor\nAppellant(s) : 1, \nMR JB PARDIWALA for Opponent(s) :\n1, \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\nDate\n: 03\/03\/2010\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tappellant-State has preferred this Appeal under Section 377 of the<br \/>\n\tCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for enhancement of sentence against<br \/>\n\tthe judgment and order of conviction dated 19th August<br \/>\n\t1996 passed by the learned Special Judge, Panchmahal at Godhra in<br \/>\n\tSpecial (Corruption) Case No.08 of 1993, whereby the learned Judge<br \/>\n\thas convicted the respondent-accused of the charges levelled against<br \/>\n\thim.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tShort facts of the case are  as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>2.1\tThe<br \/>\noriginal complainant had some disputes with regard to taking water<br \/>\nfrom the well. It is the case of the original complainant that he was<br \/>\nbeaten by his brother and his sons at the time of doing agricultural<br \/>\nwork. Because of intervention of the neighbours, the original<br \/>\ncomplainant was saved. The original complainant had lodged a<br \/>\ncomplaint with Santrampur Police Station for the said assault of his<br \/>\nbrother and sons of his brother. After filing the complaint, the<br \/>\noriginal complainant was admitted in the hospital for treatment.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.2\tThe<br \/>\ninvestigation was carried out by the present respondent-accused in<br \/>\nrespect of the complaint filed by the original complainant. It is<br \/>\nalso the say of the complainant that when the original complainant<br \/>\nwent to the respondent-accused  with his treatment certificate, the<br \/>\nrespondent-accused told the original complainant that his brother had<br \/>\nalso filed a complaint against him, therefore, the original<br \/>\ncomplainant should come along with his wife at Gothib Outpost on<br \/>\nMonday. On 16th November 1992 the complainant along with<br \/>\nhis wife and witnesses went to Gothib Outpost where their statements<br \/>\nwere recorded. It is also the case of the original complainant that<br \/>\nafter recording statements, the respondent-accused told the original<br \/>\ncomplainant that he will be taken on remand. The respondent-accused<br \/>\nfurther added that if the original complainant wants to escape from<br \/>\nthe remand, he will have to give an amount of Rs.500\/- to the<br \/>\nrespondent-accused. It is also the case of the original complainant<br \/>\nthat as he was not having money, the respondent-accused arrested the<br \/>\noriginal complainant and was produced before the Santrampur Police<br \/>\nStation, from where the original complainant got himself released on<br \/>\nbail. At that time also the respondent-accused demanded an amount of<br \/>\nRs.500\/- from the original complainant. It is also the case of the<br \/>\noriginal complainant that he stated the respondent-accused that he<br \/>\nwould give the respondent-accused an amount of Rs.500\/- on the next<br \/>\nday.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.3\tThe<br \/>\noriginal complainant therefore, approached the Anti Corruption Bureau<br \/>\non 17th<br \/>\nNovember 1992 at about 11:00 a.m. and filed the complaint against the<br \/>\nrespondent-accused. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer called two<br \/>\npanchas and after completing necessary procedure, the raid was<br \/>\ncarried out.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.4\tIt<br \/>\nis also the case of the original complainant that when he reached to<br \/>\nGothib Outpost, the respondent-accused asked the original complainant<br \/>\nthat whether the original complainant had brought Rs.500\/- as<br \/>\ndemanded or not and told him to handover Rs.500\/-. At that time the<br \/>\noriginal complainant had handed over the powdered currency notes,<br \/>\nwhich were given to him by the Anti-Corruption Bureau, to the<br \/>\nrespondent-accused. Thereafter, the respondent-accused went to the<br \/>\nadjacent room and placed the said currency notes in one of the books<br \/>\nlying in that room. Thereafter, the original complainant went outside<br \/>\nthe room and gave signal to Police Inspector Shri Pathan. Police<br \/>\nInspector Shri Pathan along with his staff members and panch witness<br \/>\nno.2 immediately rushed inside the room. Thereafter, procedure of<br \/>\nexamining under ultra-violet lamp was carried out and search of the<br \/>\naccused was also carried out. Thereafter, panch witness no.1 brought<br \/>\nthe said diary from the adjacent room, from wherein the currency<br \/>\nnotes of Rs.500\/- were traced out. The said notes were also examined<br \/>\nin the light of ultra-violet lamp. It is found that the notes were<br \/>\nshining blue. The fingers of the respondent-accused and  original<br \/>\ncomplainant were also shining blue and the pages of the diary, in<br \/>\nwhich the currency notes were placed, were also shining blue.<br \/>\nThereafter, panchnama was prepared and the currency notes were<br \/>\nseized. The statements were recorded and thereafter, the offence was<br \/>\nregistered against the respondent-accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.5\tAfter<br \/>\ninvestigation was over, the Deputy Superintendent of Police had given<br \/>\nsanction for filing the charge-sheet against the respondent-accused<br \/>\nand accordingly, the accused was charge-sheeted for the offences<br \/>\npunishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of<br \/>\nthe Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as &#8216;the<br \/>\nAct&#8217;).\n<\/p>\n<p>Thereafter<br \/>\n\tthe trial was conducted before the learned Magistrate. To prove the<br \/>\n\tcase of the prosecution, prosecution has produced oral as well as<br \/>\n\tdocumentary evidence. The prosecution has examined complainant at<br \/>\n\tExh. 10 as a Prosecution Witness No.1, Panch Witness No.2 was<br \/>\n\texamined at Exh.12, Police Inspector Pathan has been examined at<br \/>\n\tExh.14 and also produced documentary evidence in support of the<br \/>\n\tprosecution case.\n<\/p>\n<p>After<br \/>\n\thearing both the sides, the learned Special Judge, Panchmahal at<br \/>\n\tGodhra, has been pleased to convict the respondent-accused by his<br \/>\n\tjudgment and order dated 19th<br \/>\n\tAugust 1996 in Special (Corruption) Case No.08 of 1993 and sentenced<br \/>\n\tthe respondent-accused to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for one year<br \/>\n\tand to pay fine of Rs.1,000\/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) for each<br \/>\n\toffence and in default, to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for three<br \/>\n\tmonths for each offence. It was ordered that substantive sentence<br \/>\n\tshall run concurrently.\n<\/p>\n<p>Being<br \/>\n\taggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order dated<br \/>\n\t19th<br \/>\n\tAugust 1996 passed by the learned Special Judge, Panchmahal at<br \/>\n\tGodhra in Special (Corruption) Case No.08 of 1993, the<br \/>\n\tappellant-State has preferred the above-mentioned Criminal Appeal<br \/>\n\tfor enhancement of sentence before this Hon&#8217;ble Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>I<br \/>\n\thave heard Mr. R.C. Kodekar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor,<br \/>\n\tappearing on behalf of the Respondent-State and Mr. Rushabh Shah for<br \/>\n\tMr. Pardiwala, learned counsel for the respondent-accused. I have<br \/>\n\talso gone through the papers and the judgment and order passed by<br \/>\n\tthe Trial Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tR.C. Kodekar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing on<br \/>\n\tbehalf of the Respondent-State, has taken me through the documentary<br \/>\n\tevidence and has contended that demand and acceptance of illegal<br \/>\n\tgratification is proved beyond reasonable doubt against the<br \/>\n\trespondent-accused. He has also contended that accused deserves no<br \/>\n\tsympathy.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tRushabh Shah, learned counsel for the<br \/>\n\trespondent-accused, has contended that the respondent-accused is now<br \/>\n\ta retired person. He has two sons and both are dependent upon the<br \/>\n\trespondent-accused. If the sentence is enhanced as prayed for,<br \/>\n\tfamily of the respondent-accused will be ruined. So, some mercy is<br \/>\n\trequired to be shown to the respondent-accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>I<br \/>\n\thave<br \/>\n\tgone through the judgment and order passed by the Trial Court. I<br \/>\n\thave 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 and the respondent-accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tTrial Court, has after appreciating the facts and evidence on<br \/>\n\trecord, found the respondent-accused guilty of offences punishable<br \/>\n\tunder Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the<br \/>\n\tPrevention of Corruption Act, 1947. Therefore, by the judgment and<br \/>\n\torder dated 19th<br \/>\n\tAugust 1996, the learned Judge has been pleased to convict the<br \/>\n\trespondent-accused to<br \/>\n\tsuffer Rigorous Imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of<br \/>\n\tRs.1,000\/- for each offence and in default, to suffer Rigorous<br \/>\n\tImprisonment for three months for each offence and substantive<br \/>\n\tsentence will run concurrently.\n<\/p>\n<p>It<br \/>\n\tis pertinent to note that against the very same judgment, the<br \/>\n\taccused viz. Himmatsinh Badjibhai Pargi has filed Criminal Appeal<br \/>\n\tNo.818 of 1996 for quashing and setting aside the same. This Court<br \/>\n\tsimultaneously vide detailed judgment dated 03rd<br \/>\n\tMarch 2010 dismissed the said Appeal holding that the impugned<br \/>\n\tjudgment is legal, just and proper and no interference is called<br \/>\n\tfor.  In view of the same, no case is made out for enhancement of<br \/>\n\tthe sentence awarded to the respondent-accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>I<br \/>\n\tam in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate conclusion and<br \/>\n\tthe resultant order of conviction recorded by the court below and<br \/>\n\thence find no reasons to interfere with the same. Hence, the present<br \/>\n\tappeal is required to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. The<br \/>\n\tjudgment and order dated 19th<br \/>\n\tAugust 1996 passed by the learned Special Judge, Godhra in Special<br \/>\n\t(Corruption) Case No.08 of 1993, holding the respondent-accused<br \/>\n\tguilty of offences punishable under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read<br \/>\n\twith Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988<br \/>\n\tsentencing the respondent-accused to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment<br \/>\n\tfor one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000\/- and in default, to suffer<br \/>\n\tRigorous Imprisonment for three months for each offence, is hereby<br \/>\n\tconfirmed. Bail bond, if any, shall stand cancelled. Record and<br \/>\n\tProceedings to be sent back to the concerned Trial Court. Record and<br \/>\n\tProceedings to be sent back to the Trial Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>(Z.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tK. Saiyed, J)<\/p>\n<p>Anup<\/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 The on 3 March, 2010 Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/975\/1996 1\/ 9 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 975 of 1996 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-49897","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>State vs The on 3 March, 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-the-on-3-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State vs The on 3 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-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=\"2010-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-12-30T21:59:46+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State vs The on 3 March, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-30T21:59:46+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1429,\"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-the-on-3-march-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010\",\"name\":\"State vs The on 3 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-12-30T21:59:46+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State vs The on 3 March, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"State vs The on 3 March, 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-the-on-3-march-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State vs The on 3 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-12-30T21:59:46+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State vs The on 3 March, 2010","datePublished":"2010-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-30T21:59:46+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010"},"wordCount":1429,"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-the-on-3-march-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010","name":"State vs The on 3 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-12-30T21:59:46+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-3-march-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State vs The on 3 March, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49897","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=49897"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49897\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=49897"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=49897"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=49897"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}