{"id":5629,"date":"2011-06-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-06-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011"},"modified":"2018-09-14T22:44:44","modified_gmt":"2018-09-14T17:14:44","slug":"state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011","title":{"rendered":"State vs The on 14 June, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">State vs The on 14 June, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Ravi R.Tripathi, P.P.Bhatt,<\/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\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/757\/1987\t 7\/ 7\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. 757 of 1987\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI  \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE P.P.BHATT\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\n\t\t\tbe referred 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\nNAGARSING\nFATESING NUT &amp; 2 - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\nAppearance : \nMR\nKARTIK PANDYA APP for Appellant(s) : 1, \nNOTICE SERVED for\nOpponent(s) : 1 -\n3. \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 RAVI R.TRIPATHI\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE P.P.BHATT\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 14\/06\/2011 \n\n \n\n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>(Per<br \/>\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI)<\/p>\n<p>1.\tThe<br \/>\npresent appeal is notified at serial number 21 &#8220;for orders&#8221;.<br \/>\nThe remark column contains the following remark:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;*<br \/>\nB\/W un-executed upon respondent Nos. 1 to 3. As per report of<br \/>\nSessions Court, Navsari. (Only fax received) R &amp; P and paper book<br \/>\nreceived&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tOn<br \/>\nperusal of papers, it is noticed that the appeal was admitted by<br \/>\nDivision Bench of this Court (Coram: D.C.Gheewala &amp; J.P.Desai,<br \/>\nJJ. as they were then) by order dated 20th January, 1988.<br \/>\nThe order reads as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Leave<br \/>\ngranted. Appeal admitted. Bailable warrant in the sum of Rs.2000\/- to<br \/>\nissue against each of the accused&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt<br \/>\nis this order of bailable warrant which has remained un-executed on<br \/>\nall the respondents i.e.      1 to 3.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tIt<br \/>\nis painful that in the matter of 1987, bailable warrant issued by<br \/>\nthis Court on 20th January 1988 has remained un-executed.<br \/>\nIn this regard, it will be appropriate to refer to an order passed by<br \/>\nDivision Bench of this Court (Coram: A.M.Kapadia, as he then was and<br \/>\nB.N. Mehta, JJ) dated 31st January, 2011. &#8220;&#8230;.A<br \/>\nperusal of the record of the case, it is seen on behalf of the<br \/>\nappellant, Mahendrasinh H.Puwar, Police Sub-Inspector, Jalalpore<br \/>\nPolice Station, District- Navsari has filed an Affidavit, wherein it<br \/>\nis stated that, the respondents are not residing permanently anywhere<br \/>\nas they are regularly moving from one place to another for earning<br \/>\nbread and they are not easily traceable, so for further inquiry,<br \/>\nminimum two months period is required, which may be granted&#8230;.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tTaking<br \/>\ninto consideration the age of the appeal, it is deemed fit to examine<br \/>\nthe matter on merits and therefore, we heard learned APP Mr.Pandya at<br \/>\nlength. Learned APP tried to assail the judgment and order dated<br \/>\n12.6.1987 passed in Sessions Case No.83 of 1986, whereby, the learned<br \/>\nJudge was pleased to acquit the accused under Section 232 of Criminal<br \/>\nProcedure Code by giving them benefit of doubt for the offences<br \/>\npunishable under Sections 460, 395, 396 and 397 of Indian Penal Code<br \/>\n(IPC).\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tLearned<br \/>\nAPP vehemently submitted that the offences alleged against the<br \/>\npresent accused is of very grave nature, inasmuch as the mother of<br \/>\nthe complainant was killed in the incident which took place on<br \/>\n13\/14-8-85. Learned APP also submitted that there was convincing<br \/>\nevidence in the form of deposition of Bharatbhai, brother of the<br \/>\ncomplainant and Meeraben, wife of Bharatbhai.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tOn<br \/>\nperusal of the record and proceedings and the relevant documentary as<br \/>\nwell as oral evidence, this  Court is of the opinion that learned<br \/>\nJudge has not committed any error in recording acquittal of the<br \/>\npresent accused. In this regard, it is important to put it on record<br \/>\nthat the learned Judge has rightly answered issue No.1 in affirmative<br \/>\nand has then focused his attention to issue No.2 and that focused<br \/>\nattention is reflected in Para 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 and<br \/>\nlast but not least 31.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tLearned<br \/>\nJudge has also discussed the same aspect in Paragraph Nos. 32, 33,<br \/>\n34, 35 and 36 and then recorded a finding that it is not established<br \/>\nby the prosecution that the present accused-three in number, were<br \/>\npresent in the incident of loot which took place on 13\/14-8-1985.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tIn<br \/>\nhis threadbare analysis of the evidence on the point, the learned<br \/>\nJudge has given convincing reasons for not believing the evidence of<br \/>\nMeeraben and that of Bharatbhai. To illustrate some of the reasons<br \/>\nfor not believing the deposition of these two witnesses are:\n<\/p>\n<p>(i)\tBoth<br \/>\nwitnesses have tried to improve upon their version not only from<br \/>\ntheir statement before the police but even from the deposition in<br \/>\nanother sessions Case being Sessions Case No.72 of 1985. A Certified<br \/>\ncopy of deposition of Meeraben in Sessions Case No.72 of 1985 was<br \/>\nplaced before the learned Judge and though it was recorded in that<br \/>\ndeposition that, &#8216;except four persons, she has not seen any other<br \/>\npersons&#8217;, she tried to depose before the Court that she had occasion<br \/>\nto see these three accused who were standing on an &#8216;Otla&#8217; (outside<br \/>\nthe house) from the window of her bed room. Distance between the<br \/>\nwitnesses and the accused was 10 to 15 feet.\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii)\tThe<br \/>\nlearned Judge has also taken pain to notice and take appropriate note<br \/>\nof the fact that Meeraben had numbered glasses and at night to<br \/>\nidentify a person who was seen from a distance of 10 to 15 feet that<br \/>\ntoo without glasses may not be possible.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iii)Learned<br \/>\nJudge has also noted and appreciated the fact that these accused were<br \/>\narrested from Village: Bhat, District: Gandhinagar on 9.7.1986 on the<br \/>\nbasis of available description while Navsari Police visited Village:<br \/>\nBhat in connection with the investigation of a &#8216;Crime&#8217; registered as<br \/>\nC.R. No.I-215 of 1986. These three accused were handed over to PSI,<br \/>\nA.M. Rathod. Delay from 9.7.1986 to 16.7.1986 (16.7.1986 &#8211; the day on<br \/>\nwhich identification parade was held) is not explained by the<br \/>\nprosecution.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iv)(A)\tThe<br \/>\nlearned Judge has very rightly appreciated the fact that<br \/>\nidentification parade took  place on 16.7.1986. The time gap between<br \/>\nthe unfortunate incident and the identification parade was more than<br \/>\none year. The learned Judge has rightly posed a question to himself<br \/>\nthat whether a person having seen an accused for a while that too, at<br \/>\nnight from a window, at a distance of 10 to 15 feet that too while<br \/>\nshe was not having her numbered glasses on, can identify<br \/>\nsuch persons after more than one year. The learned Judge has<br \/>\ncome to a right conclusion that the evidence of this witness on this<br \/>\npoint cannot be relied upon.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iv)(B)\tIn<br \/>\nthis regard, it is equally important to note that Shri Rathod has<br \/>\ndeposed in his deposition that, &#8216;before the actual identification<br \/>\nparade took place on 16.7.1986, the identification parade was<br \/>\nscheduled on 13.7.1986 and thereafter on 15.7.1986 but for one or the<br \/>\nother reason, it could not have been held&#8217;.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iv)(C)\tOn<br \/>\nthe point of identification itself, the learned Judge has rightly<br \/>\nconsidered that, these persons were taken to the place of offence on<br \/>\n10.7.1986 at around 2.00 p.m. because as per the prosecution, they<br \/>\nwanted to show the place of offence, of their own wish. At that time,<br \/>\nPanchnama was also drawn. Learned Judge has recorded that, Meeraben<br \/>\nhas admitted in her deposition that she knew about the arrest of the<br \/>\npresent accused. Though she has not admitted that, &#8216;the police had<br \/>\ntaken Meeraben and Nitinbhai to Jalalpur Police Station and had shown<br \/>\nthe present accused. Similarly, the witness has deposed that, on<br \/>\n10.7.1986 when these accused were brought to her residence, &#8216;she had<br \/>\nnot seen them&#8217; but then no material is placed on record to show that<br \/>\nMeeraben was absent from her residence at the relevant time.\n<\/p>\n<p>(v)\tLearned<br \/>\nJudge has rightly discarded the evidence led before the Court on the<br \/>\nground that there were material contradictions and thus the<br \/>\nprosecution failed in proving the case against the accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>(vi)\t\tHowsoever,<br \/>\nheinous the crime may be the basic requirement of connecting the<br \/>\naccused with it cannot be dispensed with. It is settled principle of<br \/>\nlaw that prosecution has to discharge its pious duty of establishing<br \/>\nthe case beyond reasonable doubt. Merely because, police arrested<br \/>\nthree persons on the basis of doubt, and according to them (police),<br \/>\nthey are answering the description available with them (police)<br \/>\ncannot satisfy the requirement of proving the guilt with the help of<br \/>\nconvincing evidence.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tTaking<br \/>\ninto consideration the overall evidence available on record, this<br \/>\nCourt is of the considered opinion that learned Judge has not<br \/>\ncommitted any error in recording acquittal.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tIn<br \/>\nthe result, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>(RAVI<br \/>\nR.TRIPATHI, J.)<\/p>\n<p>(P.P.BHATT,<br \/>\nJ.)<\/p>\n<p>(ashish)<\/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 14 June, 2011 Author: Ravi R.Tripathi, P.P.Bhatt, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/757\/1987 7\/ 7 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 757 of 1987 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.P.BHATT ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of [&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-5629","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 v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>State vs The on 14 June, 2011 - 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-14-june-2011\" \/>\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 14 June, 2011 - 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-14-june-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-06-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-14T17:14:44+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\\\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State vs The on 14 June, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-06-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-14T17:14:44+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1274,\"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-14-june-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011\",\"name\":\"State vs The on 14 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-06-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-14T17:14:44+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State vs The on 14 June, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"State vs The on 14 June, 2011 - 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-14-june-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State vs The on 14 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-06-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-14T17:14:44+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\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State vs The on 14 June, 2011","datePublished":"2011-06-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-14T17:14:44+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011"},"wordCount":1274,"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-14-june-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011","name":"State vs The on 14 June, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-06-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-14T17:14:44+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-the-on-14-june-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State vs The on 14 June, 2011"}]},{"@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\/5629","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=5629"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5629\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5629"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5629"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5629"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}