{"id":54002,"date":"2008-11-04T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-03T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008"},"modified":"2017-01-04T11:37:31","modified_gmt":"2017-01-04T06:07:31","slug":"c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"C. Valli vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">C. Valli vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 November, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\t\t\t\t\t\nDATED : 4\/11\/2008\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE R.REGUPATHI\nAND\nTHE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH\n\nH.C.P(MD)No.481 of 2008\n\nC. Valli\t\t\t\t...\t\tPetitioner\n\nVs\n\n1.  The State of Tamil Nadu\n    rep. by its Secretary to Government\n    Home, Prohibition and Excise\n      (XVI) Department\n    Fort St. George\n    Chennai 600 009\n\n2.  The District Collector and\n      The District Magistrate\n    Karur District.\n\n3.  The Superintendent of Prison\n    Trichy Central Prison\n    Trichy.\n\n4.  The Chairman\n    Advisory Board\n    Coovam House\n    Omandhurar Government Estate\n    Swami Sivananda Salai\n    Chennai 600 002.\t\t\t...\t\tRespondents\n\n\t\tHabeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution\nof India, to call for the entire records connected with the detention order of\nthe second respondent in Cr.M.P.No.16 of 2008 dated 12\/5\/2008 and quash the same\nand direct the respondents to produce the body and person of the petitioner's\nhusband by name Charles, aged about 32 years, son of Lawrence, now confined at\nTrichy Central Prison before this Court and set him at liberty.\n\n!For Petitioner\t... Mr.R.Alagumani\n^For Respondents... Mr.P.N.Pandithurai\n\t\t    Additional Public Prosecutor\n- - - - - - -\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>(Order of the Court was made by R.REGUPATHI,J)<br \/>\n\t\tWife of the detenu challenges the impugned order  of detention,<br \/>\ndated 12\/5\/2008, detaining her husband as &#8220;Goonda&#8221;, as contemplated under the<br \/>\nTamil Nadu Prevention of dangerous activities of Boot leggers, Drug Offenders,<br \/>\nForest Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders, Sand Offenders, Slum-<br \/>\ngrabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982  (Tamil Nadu Act 14\/1982).\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t2.  Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that in the first<br \/>\nadverse case, the detenu was convicted under Section 397 of the Indian Penal<br \/>\nCode and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and he had<br \/>\nalready undergone the punishment; and that the second adverse case and the<br \/>\nground case have been taken on file against the detenu with reference to two<br \/>\ndifferent occurrences that took place on the same day, namely on 8\/4\/2008, and<br \/>\nboth the cases are pending investigation and the detenu was arrested on<br \/>\n10\/4\/2008.  By referring to paragraph No.3 of the ground of detention, wherein,<br \/>\nit has been mentioned as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t&#8220;Due to his atrocious activities, the general public was scattered<br \/>\non all directions.  The busiest vehicular traffic was affected for sometime.&#8221;,<\/p>\n<p>and adverting to the following observation of the Detaining Authority at<br \/>\nparagraph No.5,<br \/>\n\t\t&#8220;If he comes out on bail, he will indulge in future activities,<br \/>\nwhich will be prejudicial to the maintenance of Public Order.  Further, the<br \/>\nrecourse to normal criminal law would not have the desired effect to prevent him<br \/>\nfrom involving in such activities, which are prejudicial to the maintenance of<br \/>\nPublic Order.&#8221;,<\/p>\n<p>he submits that relevant materials are not available either in the grounds of<br \/>\ndetention or in the booklet furnished to the detenu so as to substantiate that<br \/>\nthe detenu has indulged in activities having the potential to affect the &#8220;public<br \/>\norder&#8221;;  thus, it is apparent that  there is non-application of mind on the part<br \/>\nof the detaining authority and therefore, the order of detention is vitiated.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t3.  Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on verification of<br \/>\nrelevant materials including the First Information Report, statement of<br \/>\nwitnesses in the ground case, etc., submitted that there is no material to<br \/>\nsubstantiate that, in fact, due to the activities of the detenu, the general<br \/>\npublic scattered on all directions and the busiest vehicular traffic was<br \/>\naffected for sometime; thereby, &#8220;public order&#8221; was put to peril.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t4.  We have perused the materials available on record and considered<br \/>\nthe submissions made on either side.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t5.  The occurrences pertaining to the second adverse case as well as<br \/>\nthe ground case took place on 8\/4\/2008.  As per the allegation in the ground<br \/>\ncase, the detenu fisted the complainant with hand and threatened him while his<br \/>\nassociates (three in number) by brandishing the knife, took away a cash of<br \/>\nRs.130\/-, a cheque for Rs.66,248\/- and a cell phone.  Further, the detenu and<br \/>\nhis associates threatened the complainant not to report the incident to anyone.<br \/>\nInsofar as the second adverse case is concerned, on the same day, the detenu and<br \/>\nhis associates, assaulted and robbed away a sum of Rs.550\/- and a cell phone<br \/>\nfrom the complainant.  Though the Detaining Authority has stated,<\/p>\n<p>\t\t&#8220;Due to atrocious activities, the general public was scattered on<br \/>\nall directions.  The busiest vehicular traffic was affected for some time&#8221;,<\/p>\n<p>the materials available would only substantiate that the activities of the<br \/>\ndetenu affected &#8220;law and order&#8221; and not &#8220;public order&#8221;. Even as per the<br \/>\nnarration given by the Detaining Authority with reference to the occurrence, it<br \/>\ncould be seen that the detenu threatened the complainant not to divulge the<br \/>\nincident to anyone, thereby, it could be inferred that the occurrence had taken<br \/>\nplace at a spot when there is no much public flow.  On a careful scrutiny of the<br \/>\nmaterials produced by the sponsoring authority, we hardly find any material to<br \/>\nsubstantiate that the act of the detenu affected the public order and it is<br \/>\napparent that the Detaining Authority applied the usual language as if there<br \/>\narose a problem affecting &#8220;public order&#8221;. In the absence of materials to<br \/>\nsubstantiate that &#8220;public order&#8221; was adversely affected, we are of the view that<br \/>\nthere is non-application of mind on the part of the detaining authority in<br \/>\nmaking such observations as aforementioned and passing the ultimate order of<br \/>\ndetention.  Had the Detaining Authority considered the &#8220;potentiality&#8221; of the act<br \/>\nof the detenu instead of  the &#8220;kind&#8221;, he would not have misled himself in<br \/>\narriving at such conclusion.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t6.  In a case law reported in ABDUL RAZAK NANNEKHAN PATHAN Vs.<br \/>\nPOLICE COMMISSIONER, AHMEDABAD AND ANOTHER (1989) 4 SCC &#8211; 43, the Honourable<br \/>\nApex Court observed thus:-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t&#8220;The criminal cases are confined to certain private individuals and<br \/>\nit is merely a law and order problem and it has nothing to do with maintenance<br \/>\nof public order.  Its reach and effect are not so deep as to affect the public<br \/>\nat large.  It does not create or tend to create any panic in the minds of people<br \/>\nof a particular locality or public in general nor it affects adversely the<br \/>\nmaintenance of public order.  An act may create a law and order problem but such<br \/>\nan act does not necessarily cause an obstruction to the maintenance of public<br \/>\norder.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, any disorderly behaviour  of a person in the public or commission of<br \/>\na criminal offence is bound to some extent affect the peace prevailing in the<br \/>\nlocality and it may also affect law and order problem,  but the same need not<br \/>\naffect maintenance of public order.  A distinction has to be drawn between law<br \/>\nand order and maintenance of public order.  In order that an activity may be<br \/>\nsaid to affect adversely the maintenance of public order, there must be<br \/>\nmaterials to show that there has been a feeling of insecurity among the general<br \/>\npublic.   It might affect specific individuals only, and, therefore, touches the<br \/>\nproblem of law and order problem only.  Every infraction of law must necessarily<br \/>\naffect order, but an act affecting law and order may not necessarily also affect<br \/>\nthe public order.  The true test is not the kind, but the potentiality of the<br \/>\nact in question.  One act may affect only individuals while the other, though of<br \/>\na similar kind, may have such an impact that it would disturb the even tempo of<br \/>\nthe life of the Community.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t8.  In the light of the above discussion, we are of the considered<br \/>\nview that there was no sufficient material available with the detaining<br \/>\nauthority to substantiate that the detenu created a scene of scare and a feeling<br \/>\nof insecurity in the minds of the Community in the locality; thereby, there was<br \/>\ndisturbance to the public order and the even tempo of the life of the public has<br \/>\nbeen affected.  The detaining authority, without application of mind,<br \/>\nmechanically passed the impugned order and therefore, the same is liable to be<br \/>\nset aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t9.  In the result, \tthe Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and<br \/>\nthe order of detention passed by  the  second  respondent  in Cr.M.P.No.16  of<br \/>\n2008 dated 12\/5\/2008 is set aside.  The detenu is directed to be set at liberty<br \/>\nforthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case or<br \/>\ncause.\n<\/p>\n<p>mvs.\n<\/p>\n<p>To:\n<\/p>\n<p>1.  The Secretary to Government<br \/>\n    The State of Tamil Nadu<br \/>\n    Home, Prohibition and Excise<br \/>\n      (XVI) Department<br \/>\n    Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009\n<\/p>\n<p>2.  The District Collector and<br \/>\n      The District Magistrate<br \/>\n    Karur District.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.  The Superintendent of Prison<br \/>\n    Trichy Central Prison, Trichy.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.  The Chairman<br \/>\n    Advisory Board, Coovam House<br \/>\n    Omandhurar Government Estate<br \/>\n    Swami Sivananda Salai, Chennai 600 002.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.   The Public Prosecutor,<br \/>\n     Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,<br \/>\n     Madurai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court C. Valli vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 November, 2008 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 4\/11\/2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE R.REGUPATHI AND THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH H.C.P(MD)No.481 of 2008 C. Valli &#8230; Petitioner Vs 1. The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary 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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-54002","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>C. Valli vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 November, 2008 - 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\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"C. Valli vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-11-03T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-04T06:07:31+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\\\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"C. Valli vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-04T06:07:31+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1261,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008\",\"name\":\"C. Valli vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-03T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-04T06:07:31+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"C. Valli vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 November, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"C. Valli vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 November, 2008 - 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\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"C. Valli vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-03T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-04T06:07:31+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\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"C. Valli vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-04T06:07:31+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008"},"wordCount":1261,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008","name":"C. Valli vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-03T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-04T06:07:31+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/c-valli-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-on-4-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"C. Valli vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 November, 2008"}]},{"@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\/54002","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=54002"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/54002\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=54002"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=54002"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=54002"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}