{"id":60045,"date":"2010-02-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010"},"modified":"2019-01-06T13:35:14","modified_gmt":"2019-01-06T08:05:14","slug":"arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"Arvind vs Appearance : on 22 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Arvind vs Appearance : on 22 February, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: A.L.Dave,&Nbsp;Honourable Ms.Justice H.N.Devani,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   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\/909\/2002\t 8\/ 8\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. 909 of 2002\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE  \nHONOURABLE\nMS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI\n \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 \n\nARVIND\nMANSUKH MAKWANA - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================\n \nAppearance : \nMS\nJ.R.ACHARYA for Appellant \nMR LB DABHI, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for\nRespondent \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 A.L.DAVE\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\tMS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 22\/02\/2010 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n
(Per
\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)<\/p>\n
The
\n\tappellant came to be tried by Sessions Court, Junagadh for the
\n\toffence of murder of Nirmalaben, wife of Jagdish Shantilal Solanki,
\n\tby entering into her house located at Raghuvir Society of Junagadh,
\n\ton 11.2.1998 at about 13:00 hours and came to be convicted therefor
\n\tby judgement and order dated 16th July 2002 in Sessions
\n\tCase No.65 of 1998.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tbrief facts of the case are that the appellant and deceased
\n\tNirmalaben were in an affair for a long time.  Somehow, the victim
\n\trefused to continue the relationship which annoyed the appellant.
\n\tHe, therefore, went to her house at 13:00 hours on 11.2.1998 and
\n\tinflicted a knife blow on right side of the chest of the victim,
\n\twhich ultimately resulted into her death.  The incident was seen by
\n\tthe children of the victim.  On the victim and the children raising
\n\talarm, the neighbours arrived and the appellant was caught in the
\n\tprocess of escaping.  The victim was taken to the hospital, where
\n\tshe gave history to the doctor, whereafter her dying declaration was
\n\trecorded by the Executive Magistrate.  Her FIR was also recorded by
\n\tpolice.  In the history to the doctor as well as in the FIR and the
\n\tdying declaration, she has implicated the appellant.  The police
\n\tfiled chargesheet against the appellant in the Court of the learned
\n\tChief Judicial Magistrate, Junagadh, who in turn committed the case
\n\tto the Court of Sessions, and Sessions Case No.65 of 1998 came to be
\n\tregistered.\n<\/p>\n
(2.1)\t\tCharge
\n\twas framed against the appellant   accused at exh.1 for the
\n\toffences punishable under Sections 452 and 302 of Indian Penal Code,
\n\tto which he pleaded not guilty and came to be tried.  The Trial
\n\tCourt convicted him for both the offences and sentenced to undergo
\n\timprisonment for rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years
\n\twith a fine of Rs.500\/-, in default, to undergo rigorous
\n\timprisonment for one month for the offence punishable under Section
\n\t452 of IPC, whereas he came to be convicted for a lesser offence
\n\tpunishable under Section 304 Part-I of IPC and sentenced to undergo
\n\timprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.1,000\/-, in  default, to
\n\tundergo rigorous imprisonment for two months.  The sentences were
\n\tordered to run concurrently and hence, this appeal.\n<\/p>\n
We
\n\thave heard learned advocate Ms.J.R.Acharya for the appellant and
\n\tlearned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.L.B.Dabhi for the State.\n<\/p>\n
Learned
\n\tadvocate for the appellant submitted that it would not be possible
\n\tto assail the judgement on question of involvement of the appellant
\n\tin the incident considering the quality of evidence led by the
\n\tprosecution.  However, the Trial Court erred in convicting the
\n\tappellant for offence punishable under Section 304 Part-I of IPC, it
\n\tshould have been under Section 304 Part-II of IPC.  In order to
\n\tsupport this contention, our attention is drawn to the fact that the
\n\tknife which is allegedly used by the appellant in commission of the
\n\tcrime is an ordinary domestic kitchen knife.  The blow was given on
\n\tprovocation. Only one blow is given.  The appellant and the victim
\n\thad been maintaining relations for a long time and suddenly, the
\n\tvictim refused to continue with the relationship which may have
\n\tagitated the appellant, whereupon he got provoked and assaulted the
\n\tvictim.  The assailant cannot be considered to be with an intention
\n\tfor the reason that he has given only one knife blow.  It was,
\n\ttherefore, submitted that the conviction may be altered from one
\n\tpunishable under Section 304 Part-I of IPC to one punishable under
\n\tSection 304 Part-II of IPC, and sentence may appropriately be
\n\treduced.  The appellant is in jail for a long time and therefore,
\n\tthe sentence already undergone may be considered as adequate for the
\n\tpurpose.  The appeal may, therefore, accordingly, be allowed.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tlearned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr.Dabhi has opposed the
\n\tappeal.  According to him, the knife, though may be a domestic one,
\n\tits size is not so small.  The blow is given on vital part of the
\n\tbody, which has resulted into injury to the liver.   The version of
\n\tthe eye-witness child only indicates that the appellant came, around
\n\tthat time the victim came out of the bathroom after cleaning vessels
\n\tand the appellant inflicted knife blow.  As such, there was no
\n\tprovocation by the deceased and therefore, the appeal may be
\n\tdismissed.\n<\/p>\n
We
\n\thave considered rival side submissions and have examined the record
\n\tand proceedings in that context.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tinvolvement of the appellant in the incident is not in dispute, and
\n\trightly so in our opinion.   The evidence of eye-witness Kaushik
\n\tRajeshbhai Solanki, exh.31 clearly implicates the appellant.  The
\n\twitness is subjected to cross-examination in detail, but nothing
\n\tturns on it.  No material contradiction, omission or improvement is
\n\tindicated to render the deposition doubtful.\n<\/p>\n
(7.1)\t\tIn
\n\tsupport of evidence of Kaushik Rajeshbhai Solanki, there is evidence
\n\tin form of the dying declaration, exh.26, recorded by witness
\n\tMaheshbhai Bhikhabhai Dafda, Executive Magistrate, at exh.24.  The
\n\tdeposition indicates that no doubt about the genuineness of
\n\trecording of the dying declaration can be raised.  He took all
\n\tprecautions before recording dying declaration as to conscious and
\n\tfit state of mind of the declarant, the victim and then, the dying
\n\tdeclaration clearly implicates the appellant.  In view of the
\n\tevidence of Kaushik Rajeshbhai Solanki, no doubt can be raised about
\n\ttruthfulness of the dying declaration either.  In our opinion,
\n\ttherefore, learned advocate for the appellant is justified in not
\n\tdisputing the involvement of the appellant in the incident.\n<\/p>\n
It
\n\twould be whether relevant to examine the genesis of the incident or
\n\thow the incident occurred.  In this context, the evidence of a child
\n\twitness Kaushik Rajeshbhai Solanki, exh.31, is relevant.  He says
\n\tthat he had not gone to the school as there was a meeting of the
\n\tteachers.  His father had gone to work.  He came back for lunch at
\n\tabout 12:00 hours noon and left for work at about 12:30 p.m.
\n\tWitness says that he was playing with his sister Guddi on the cot
\n\twhich is in the room.  Then one person came into the room.  Around
\n\tthat time, his mother came to the room from bathroom after cleaning
\n\tvessels and the person inflicted knife blow on her chest.  His
\n\tmother was pushed on the cot.    From the bleeding from her chest,
\n\tthere are marks of blood on the cot and on the floor.  The man who
\n\thad assaulted, tried to escape, but was caught by Pathakbhai and
\n\tothers.  The witness has been cross-examined at length, but no
\n\tquestion is put on his version about the incident, nor even a
\n\tchallenge is made to his version about the incident.  The dying
\n\tdeclaration was recorded by Maheshbhai Bhikhabhai Dafda, Executive
\n\tMagistrate, at exh.24.  In that dying declaration also, she has
\n\tstated that she was maintaining an affair with the
\n\taccused-appellant.  When she refused to continue the relationship
\n\tand asked him not to go to her place, he got provoked and inflicted
\n\tknife blow on her chest.\n<\/p>\n
From
\n\tthe ocular evidence as well as documentary evidence, contemporaneous
\n\tin nature in the form of FIR and dying declaration, we find that the
\n\tappellant went to the house of the victim at about 13:00 hours of
\n\tthe day when ordinarily no male could be at home.  After entering
\n\tthe house, there is one version which says that he inflicted knife
\n\tblow straightaway.  That version has remained unchallenged.  There
\n\tis another version which says that, because the victim refused to
\n\tcontinue with the relationship, he inflicted knife blow.  But the
\n\tfact remains, he went to the house of the victim with a knife and
\n\tinflicted the blow upon the victim, which resulted into her death.
\n\tThe size of the blade of the knife was about 14 cm x 2.5 cm.  The
\n\tblow is given on the chest which has resulted into a deep injury
\n\tdamaging the liver.\n<\/p>\n
If
\n\tall these factors are taken collectively, we are of the view that
\n\tthe argument that the case would fall under Section 304 Part-II of
\n\tIPC, cannot be accepted.  It is difficult to attribute mere
\n\tknowledge that the injury caused by the appellant was likely to
\n\tcause death of the victim in light of the above evidence.  The State
\n\thas not preferred any appeal to challenge acquittal under Section
\n\t302 of IPC.  Under the circumstances, in our view, the conviction of
\n\tthe appellant or the sentence does not call for any interference in
\n\texercise of appellate jurisdiction. The act on the part of the
\n\tappellant of entering the house with a knife and inflicting the blow
\n\ton vital part of the body of the deceased with that knife with a
\n\tforce that the knife went deep into thoracic cavity and damaged the
\n\tliver, resulting in her death, cannot be considered unintentional.
\n\tIn the circumstances, the submission that conviction under Section
\n\t304 Part-I of IPC is not sustainable, cannot be accepted.\n<\/p>\n
It
\n\twas argued that the sentence awarded by the Trial Court of
\n\timprisonment for life is too harsh and may be reduced.  In this
\n\tcontext, in our view, considering the circumstances in which the
\n\tincident has occurred, namely, the appellant entering the house of
\n\tthe victim and inflicting knife blow on her chest, either for no
\n\treason or for her refusing to continue illicit relationship with the
\n\tappellant, would not justify any assault, least a life-taking
\n\tassault on part of the appellant.  The sentence awarded, therefore,
\n\tdoes not call for any interference at our end.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tappeal, therefore, must fail.  Stands dismissed.  The judgement and
\n\torder dated 16th July 2002 rendered in Sessions Case
\n\tNo.65 of 1998 by the Sessions Court, Junagadh, is hereby confirmed.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t[A.L.DAVE,
\nJ.]<\/p>\n
[HARSHA
\nDEVANI, J.]<\/p>\n
parmar*<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Arvind vs Appearance : on 22 February, 2010 Author: A.L.Dave,&Nbsp;Honourable Ms.Justice H.N.Devani,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/909\/2002 8\/ 8 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 909 of 2002 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE H.N.DEVANI ========================================= 1 Whether Reporters of […]<\/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-60045","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nArvind vs Appearance : on 22 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Arvind vs Appearance : on 22 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-01-06T08:05:14+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Arvind vs Appearance : on 22 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-06T08:05:14+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1621,\"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\\\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010\",\"name\":\"Arvind vs Appearance : on 22 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-06T08:05:14+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Arvind vs Appearance : on 22 February, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Arvind vs Appearance : on 22 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Arvind vs Appearance : on 22 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-01-06T08:05:14+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Arvind vs Appearance : on 22 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-06T08:05:14+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010"},"wordCount":1621,"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\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010","name":"Arvind vs Appearance : on 22 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-06T08:05:14+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/arvind-vs-appearance-on-22-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Arvind vs Appearance : on 22 February, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60045","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=60045"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60045\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=60045"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=60045"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=60045"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}