{"id":57720,"date":"2007-08-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-08-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007"},"modified":"2017-08-03T21:01:25","modified_gmt":"2017-08-03T15:31:25","slug":"varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007","title":{"rendered":"Varghese vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Varghese vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2007<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCRL A No. 1005 of 2007(A)\n\n\n1. VARGHESE, S\/O.KALOSE\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :ADV.P.V.VIJAYA KUMAR (STATE BRIEF)\n\n                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.THANKAPPAN\n\n Dated :14\/08\/2007\n\n O R D E R\n                          K. THANKAPPAN, J.\n                ------------------------------------------\n                       CRL.A.NO.1005 OF 2007-A\n                ------------------------------------------\n             Dated this the 14th day of August, 2007.\n\n                               JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
      Appellant is the 2nd accused in S.C.No.287\/2006 on the file of<\/p>\n
the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc)-II, Kalpetta.       He faced trial<\/p>\n
for an offence punishable under Section 55 (a) of the Abkari Act<\/p>\n
along with the 1st accused on the allegation that both the accused<\/p>\n
were found in possession of 1.5 liters of arrack and two disposable<\/p>\n
glasses on 23.7.2005 at about 7.05 p.m at a place called C.R.P.<\/p>\n
Kunnu in Periya     village within the limits of      Thalappuzha Police<\/p>\n
Station in contravention of the provisions of the Abkakri Act.       To<\/p>\n
prove the case     against the appellant and        the other  accused,<\/p>\n
prosecution examined 7 witnesses and relied on Exts.P1 to P7. MOs<\/p>\n
1 and 2 were also produced.      After closing of the prosecution case,<\/p>\n
the appellant and the other accused were questioned under Section<\/p>\n
313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The appellant and the other<\/p>\n
accused denied    the prosecution charge. However, the trial court<\/p>\n
relying on the evidence     adduced by the prosecution        found the<\/p>\n
appellant and the 1st accused guilty under Section 58 of the Abkari<\/p>\n
Act and they were convicted thereunder and sentenced to undergo<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1005\/2007                  2<\/span><\/p>\n
R.I for one year each and also to pay fine of Rs. One lakh each<\/p>\n
with default sentence of payment of fine, to undergo R.I for three<\/p>\n
months.    The trial court also allowed set off under Section 428 of<\/p>\n
the the Code.      The conviction and sentence ordered against the<\/p>\n
appellant is challenged in this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
2.      Since the appeal is filed through the jail authorities and the<\/p>\n
appellant is not having a counsel of his own choice, a        member<\/p>\n
from the State brief panel has been appointed to argue the case for<\/p>\n
and on behalf of the       appellant.      Heard the learned counsel<\/p>\n
appearing for the appellant and the Public Prosecutor.   The learned<\/p>\n
counsel    appearing for the      appellant had   taken the following<\/p>\n
contentions before this Court to challenge the judgment of the trial<\/p>\n
court.   Firstly it is contended that the trial court went wrong in<\/p>\n
placing reliance on the evidence of Pws 1 and 2, the Police Officials,<\/p>\n
alone to find the appellant guilty of the charge as the independent<\/p>\n
witnesses examined       by the prosecution did not      support the<\/p>\n
prosecution case at all.     Secondly, it is contended  that the trial<\/p>\n
court committed       a serious error in finding the appellant guilty<\/p>\n
under Section 58 of the Abkari Act as there was no evidence before<\/p>\n
the court to prove that the appellant was found in possession of any<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1005\/2007                 3<\/span><\/p>\n
arrack whereas, the charge was that he was found in possession of<\/p>\n
two disposable glasses.     Thirdly it is contended that even if the<\/p>\n
evidence of Pws     1 and 2 is    accepted,  the prosecution had not<\/p>\n
succeeded in proving that the appellant was in physical possession<\/p>\n
of    MO1,    from which the sample alleged to have been taken by<\/p>\n
PW1.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
3.    Before considering the    contentions of the learned counsel, it<\/p>\n
has to be noted that, as per the prosecution charge,       PW1 – the<\/p>\n
Sub Inspector of Police     and the other police officials on getting<\/p>\n
information that the appellant and the 1st accused were engaged in<\/p>\n
selling arrack at C.R.P.Kunnu and on reaching that place, PW1 and<\/p>\n
other police officials have noted that A1 was holding MO1 cannas,<\/p>\n
which contained     1.5 liters of  arrack.      Further   case of the<\/p>\n
prosecution is that   when the police party reached at the place, the<\/p>\n
appellant was holding two disposable glasses and the allegation is<\/p>\n
that both the 1st accused and the   appellant were engaged in selling<\/p>\n
arrack at the place of the incident. The evidence of Pws 1 and 2<\/p>\n
would show that the sample alleged to have been taken from MO1<\/p>\n
cannas has been got analysed and as per Ext.P7 chemical report it<\/p>\n
was reported that the sample contained 37.02% and 36.81% of<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1005\/2007                  4<\/span><\/p>\n
ethyl alcohol by volume and hence the appellant committed the<\/p>\n
offence. The trial court relied on the evidence of PW2 – the constable,<\/p>\n
who accompanied PW1 at the time of detection of the crime.        The<\/p>\n
trial court further relied on the evidence of PWs 3 and 4 – the two<\/p>\n
Sub Inspectors of Police, who conducted part of the investigation<\/p>\n
and filed the final charge. The question       to be considered in this<\/p>\n
appeal is whether the prosecution had succeeded in proving that the<\/p>\n
appellant was found in possession of any arrack and had committed<\/p>\n
any offence punishable either under Section 58 of the Abkari Act or<\/p>\n
not. In this context, the charge framed against the appellant and<\/p>\n
the other accused has to be noted.         The charge framed by the<\/p>\n
court reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n
                “That you on 23.7.2005 by 7.00 p.m was
\n         found at C.R.P Kunnu in Periya 39, in possession
\n         of 1.5 liters   of   arrack and two glasses     and
\n         thereby you have committed the offence punishable
\n         u\/s.55(a) of the Abkari Act.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
4.     A reading of the charge itself would show that the appellant<\/p>\n
was also charged for the possession of 1.5 liters of arrack and two<\/p>\n
glasses.   But   if the evidence of Pws 1 and 2 has been analysed,<\/p>\n
it  could be seen that either     PW1 or Pw2     had no case that the<\/p>\n
appellant    was in possession of either Mo1 or     any arrack which<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1005\/2007               5<\/span><\/p>\n
contained in MO1. The evidence of the     two witnesses   shows that<\/p>\n
MO1 cannas, which contained arrack, was in possession of the 1st<\/p>\n
accused.    Even though PW1 had stated before the court that<\/p>\n
MO2, two disposable glasses, were seized from the appellant and<\/p>\n
smell was emanating from the glasses but, that fact was not<\/p>\n
recorded in Ext.P2 mahazar by which MO1 cannas and MO2 glasses<\/p>\n
were alleged to have been seized by PW1.        In Ext.P2 it is only<\/p>\n
stated that ”\n<\/p>\n
There is no other   statement regarding speciality of the glasses in<\/p>\n
Ext.P2.   That apart, the prosecution case itself was that PW1 had<\/p>\n
got information that two persons were engaged in selling   arrack at<\/p>\n
C.R.P.Kunnu. But when they reached at the place, they could seen<\/p>\n
a building in the open place and the 1st accused was in possession of<\/p>\n
MO1, which contained arrack.      There was no evidence before the<\/p>\n
court to show that the appellant and     the other   accused    were<\/p>\n
engaged in selling arrack to anybody or there was no recovery of<\/p>\n
any money either     from the appellant  or  from the 1st   accused.<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1005\/2007                 6<\/span><\/p>\n
Though Pws 1 and 2 had a case that both the appellant and the<\/p>\n
the 1st accused were    under the influence of  arrack,  no evidence<\/p>\n
has been adduced to prove that allegation. In Ext.P4 thondi list it is<\/p>\n
specifically stated that ”\n<\/p>\n
                                “.  There is no other specification of<\/p>\n
these two disposable glasses. It is also to be noted that when PW1<\/p>\n
was cross examined, he had      admitted the fact that there was no<\/p>\n
seal or label on MO2 glasses so as to hold that these glasses were<\/p>\n
seized from the appellant.     Even if these  glasses were seized,<\/p>\n
there was no evidence to show that the appellant was engaged in<\/p>\n
selling arrack along with the 1st accused and there was no evidence<\/p>\n
before the court to hold that the appellant was holding any arrack<\/p>\n
along with A1. In this context, the trial court held in paragraph 14<\/p>\n
of the judgment that the circumstances under which the appellant<\/p>\n
has been found in the company of 1st accused would prove that he<\/p>\n
was also in joint possession of Mo1.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
5.    This Court is not in a position to uphold the reasoning of the<\/p>\n
trial judge   regarding    joint possession of   MO1    with the   1st<\/p>\n
accused.    Even to prove   possession of any contraband, it has to<\/p>\n
be proved that      such possessor    or the person possessing the<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1005\/2007                  7<\/span><\/p>\n
substance should have a control over the said           contraband or<\/p>\n
even he could be with perfect control over such property. In this<\/p>\n
context, the evidence of Pws 1 and 2 would not show that the<\/p>\n
appellant has any control over MO1, which contained arrack, as<\/p>\n
alleged by the prosecution.    At the same, the prosecution case was<\/p>\n
that MO1, which contained arrack, was in the possession of A1 and<\/p>\n
not in the possession of the appellant.   If so, the finding of the trial<\/p>\n
court      that  the appellant     was in possession of MO1,      which<\/p>\n
contained arrack, is not based on any legally acceptable evidence.<\/p>\n
Two    disposable  glasses    have been     found in possession of the<\/p>\n
appellant by itself would not attract any offence as contemplated<\/p>\n
either under Sections 8 or 58 of the Abkari Act.           Even if the<\/p>\n
prosecution could prove that MO1 contained 1.5 liters of arrack, the<\/p>\n
offence could attract Section 8 and not Section 58 of the Act. In the<\/p>\n
light of that fact also, the finding entered by the appellant is not<\/p>\n
sustainable in law.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
6.    Without considering    the    other   contentions   raised by the<\/p>\n
learned counsel appearing for the appellant, this Court is of the view<\/p>\n
that the   appellant is   entitled for clear  acquittal of the   charge.<\/p>\n
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.    The judgment of the trial court<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1005\/2007                 8<\/span><\/p>\n
is set aside and the appellant, the 2nd accused, in S.C.No.287\/2006<\/p>\n
on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc)-II, Kalpetta, has<\/p>\n
to be released forthwith unless he is required to be kept in jail in<\/p>\n
connection with any other case.\n<\/p>\n
     Ordered accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                          K. THANKAPPAN, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
\n  cl<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1005\/2007    9<\/span><\/p>\n
                         K. THANKAPPAN, J.\n<\/p>\n
                         CRL.A.NO.1005 OF 2007-A<\/p>\n
                         JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
                         14th August, 2007.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Varghese vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM CRL A No. 1005 of 2007(A) 1. VARGHESE, S\/O.KALOSE … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA … Respondent For Petitioner :ADV.P.V.VIJAYA KUMAR (STATE BRIEF) For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Hon’ble MR. Justice K.THANKAPPAN Dated :14\/08\/2007 […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-57720","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nVarghese vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2007 - 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\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Varghese vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-08-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-08-03T15:31:25+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\\\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Varghese vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-08-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-03T15:31:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007\"},\"wordCount\":1563,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007\",\"name\":\"Varghese vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-08-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-08-03T15:31:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Varghese vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"Varghese vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2007 - 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\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Varghese vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-08-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-08-03T15:31:25+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\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Varghese vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2007","datePublished":"2007-08-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-03T15:31:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007"},"wordCount":1563,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007","name":"Varghese vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-08-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-08-03T15:31:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/varghese-vs-state-of-kerala-on-14-august-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Varghese vs State Of Kerala on 14 August, 2007"}]},{"@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\/57720","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=57720"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/57720\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=57720"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=57720"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=57720"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}