{"id":61006,"date":"2009-12-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-12-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009"},"modified":"2014-04-11T01:51:00","modified_gmt":"2014-04-10T20:21:00","slug":"syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009","title":{"rendered":"Syamkumar vs P.R.Sasi on 23 December, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Syamkumar vs P.R.Sasi on 23 December, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCrl.Rev.Pet.No. 3895 of 2009()\n\n\n1. SYAMKUMAR, AGED 38 YEARS,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. P.R.SASI, S\/O. RAMAN,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.S.GOPINATHAN\n\n Dated :23\/12\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                 P.S.Gopinathan, J.\n    ==========================================\n               Crl.R.P.3895 of 2009\n    ==========================================\n     Dated this the 23rd day of December, 2009.\n\n\n                       ORDER\n<\/pre>\n
1.The revision petitioner was convicted by the<\/p>\n
 Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Aluva<\/p>\n
 in S.T.No.1807 of 2004 on his file for offence<\/p>\n
 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments<\/p>\n
 Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment<\/p>\n
 for  six  months  and   to  pay  Rs.2,90,000\/-  as<\/p>\n
 compensation  with   default  clause   to  undergo<\/p>\n
 simple   imprisonment   for   sixty   days.     In<\/p>\n
 Crl.A.1060\/08, the Additional Sessions Judge (Ad-<\/p>\n
 hoc)-III,   North   Parur,   by   judgment   dated<\/p>\n
 14.10.2009,    confirmed   the    conviction   and<\/p>\n
 sentence.  Now this revision.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
2.Having heard the learned counsel for the revision<\/p>\n
 petitioner, who had taken me through the evidence<\/p>\n
 of P.W.1 and perusing the judgment of the courts<\/p>\n
 below, I find that the wife of the deceased<\/p>\n
 CRRP3895\/09              -:2:-<\/span><\/p>\n
 complainant,   who  was  examined  as  P.W.1,  had<\/p>\n
 succeeded    to   establish   that  the   revision<\/p>\n
 petitioner borrowed a sum of Rs.2,90,000\/- from<\/p>\n
 the deceased complainant and in discharge of the<\/p>\n
 liability, Ext.P1 cheque dated 13.3.2004 for the<\/p>\n
 said amount drawn on Corporation Bank, Angamaly<\/p>\n
 branch was issued and that when presented for<\/p>\n
 collection   through  the   Union Bank  of  India,<\/p>\n
 Athani     branch,   it    was   dishonoured   for<\/p>\n
 insufficiency of funds, as evidenced by Exts.P2<\/p>\n
 and P3 memos.     Though a lawyer notice, copy of<\/p>\n
 which was marked as Ext.P4 was caused demanding<\/p>\n
 discharge   of  the  liability,  it  was  returned<\/p>\n
 unclaimed.   The liability was not discharged.<\/p>\n
3.The revision petitioner took up a defence that<\/p>\n
 the cheque in dispute was handed over to one Bose<\/p>\n
 and that the transaction was settled.      But the<\/p>\n
 cheque was not returned by Bose.     In support of<\/p>\n
 the defence version, the revision petitioner had<\/p>\n
CRRP3895\/09             -:3:-<\/span><\/p>\n
given evidence.     The learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
revision petitioner had advanced an argument that<\/p>\n
deceased complainant had no capacity to pay that<\/p>\n
much   amount   and  in  that  circumstance,   the<\/p>\n
existence of a legally recoverable debt is not a<\/p>\n
matter of presumption under Section 139 of the<\/p>\n
Negotiable Instruments Act.    In support of the<\/p>\n
argument, the learned counsel had relied upon the<\/p>\n
dictum laid down by the Apex Court in Krishna<\/p>\n
Janardhan Bhat v. Dattatraya G.Hegde<\/a> [(2008 (1)<\/p>\n
K.LT. 425 (SC)].   Going by the evidence of P.W.1,<\/p>\n
I find that P.W.1 had satisfactorily explained<\/p>\n
the source of income, which was not in fact<\/p>\n
challenged. Neither there is any suggestion to<\/p>\n
P.W.1 that the complainant, who was the husband<\/p>\n
of P.W.1, has no source to pay the amount.     The<\/p>\n
evidence of P.W.1 remains unimpeached.     In the<\/p>\n
light of the unimpeached evidence of P.W.1, the<\/p>\n
defence     version  even    does   not    advance<\/p>\n
preponderance of probability.   The ratio of the<\/p>\n
 CRRP3895\/09               -:4:-<\/span><\/p>\n
 above decision is not applicable to the case on<\/p>\n
 hand.     Though the revision petitioner had got a<\/p>\n
 case that the cheque was issued to one Bose as<\/p>\n
 regards another transaction and that was settled,<\/p>\n
 there is no supporting evidence other than oath<\/p>\n
 against oath.     The veracity of the testimony of<\/p>\n
 P.W.1 could not be shaken in cross-examination.<\/p>\n
 The testimony of the revision petitioner as D.W.1<\/p>\n
 could not rebut the presumptions in favour of the<\/p>\n
 complainant.     It is in the above circumstance,<\/p>\n
 the courts below had believed the testimony of<\/p>\n
 P.W.1 to arrive at a finding in favour of the<\/p>\n
 complainant that Ext.P1 was issued in discharge<\/p>\n
 of existing liability.    The fact that Ext.P1 was<\/p>\n
 dishonoured is in fact not disputed.   There is no<\/p>\n
 case for the revision petitioner that he had<\/p>\n
 sufficient funds in his account to honour the<\/p>\n
 cheque.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
4.The   learned   counsel    had  also  advanced  a<\/p>\n
CRRP3895\/09               -:5:-<\/span><\/p>\n
contention that since the notice was returned,<\/p>\n
there is no statutory notice and the prosecution<\/p>\n
is vitiated for want of notice.     The courts below<\/p>\n
had considered the contention advanced by the<\/p>\n
revision    petitioner   and    found  that   Ext.P5<\/p>\n
returned    notice  was  duly   addressed  and  duly<\/p>\n
stamped.    The postman had taken the notice to the<\/p>\n
revision petitioner on one occasion and since he<\/p>\n
was absent it was taken back and on another<\/p>\n
occasion it was endorsed that the notice returned<\/p>\n
as unclaimed.    There is no material on record to<\/p>\n
show that the first respondent or her husband had<\/p>\n
anyway    interfered  with   the  due  discharge  of<\/p>\n
duties by the postman.     There is little material<\/p>\n
to show that the postman had made endorsement<\/p>\n
with    any  ulterior   motive.      In  the   above<\/p>\n
circumstances, it is to be presumed that the<\/p>\n
postman had discharged his duties in good faith<\/p>\n
and the endorsement made on Ext.P5 is also in<\/p>\n
good faith.     There is no reason to reject the<\/p>\n
 CRRP3895\/09               -:6:-<\/span><\/p>\n
 endorsement on Ext.P5.      Hence, the courts below<\/p>\n
 were justified in arriving at a conclusion that<\/p>\n
 there    was   constructive    notice.    There   is<\/p>\n
 substantive      compliance    of    the   statutory<\/p>\n
 requirements.      The  conviction   is  based  upon<\/p>\n
 cogent     evidence  and  is    not  liable  to   be<\/p>\n
 interfered with in exercise of the revisional<\/p>\n
 powers.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
5.Taking note that the the business of the revision<\/p>\n
 petitioner     ended  in   failure   and  that   the<\/p>\n
 financial    difficulties   led   him  to face   the<\/p>\n
 prosecution, I find that he is entitled to a<\/p>\n
 little leniency in sentence and that a sentence<\/p>\n
 of imprisonment till rising of the court with a<\/p>\n
 fine of Rs.2,90,000\/- would meet the ends of<\/p>\n
 justice.\n<\/p>\n
 In the result, this revision petition is allowed<\/p>\n
 in part.      While confirming the conviction, the<\/p>\n
 CRRP3895\/09              -:7:-<\/span><\/p>\n
 substantive sentence is reduced to imprisonment<\/p>\n
 till   rising   of  the  court    and  a  fine  of<\/p>\n
 Rs.2,90,000\/-.    In default of payment of fine,<\/p>\n
 the   revision  petitioner    shall undergo  simple<\/p>\n
 imprisonment   for  six   months.    The   revision<\/p>\n
 petitioner is granted six months’ time to pay the<\/p>\n
 fine.    Till then, the bail bond executed by him<\/p>\n
 shall remain in force.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                         P.S.Gopinathan, Judge.\n<\/p>\n
sl.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Syamkumar vs P.R.Sasi on 23 December, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 3895 of 2009() 1. SYAMKUMAR, AGED 38 YEARS, … Petitioner Vs 1. P.R.SASI, S\/O. RAMAN, … Respondent 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC For Petitioner :SRI.J.JULIAN XAVIER For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon’ble MR. […]<\/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-61006","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSyamkumar vs P.R.Sasi on 23 December, 2009 - 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\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Syamkumar vs P.R.Sasi on 23 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-12-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-04-10T20:21:00+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Syamkumar vs P.R.Sasi on 23 December, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-04-10T20:21:00+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009\"},\"wordCount\":954,\"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\\\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009\",\"name\":\"Syamkumar vs P.R.Sasi on 23 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-04-10T20:21:00+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Syamkumar vs P.R.Sasi on 23 December, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Syamkumar vs P.R.Sasi on 23 December, 2009 - 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\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Syamkumar vs P.R.Sasi on 23 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-12-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-04-10T20:21:00+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Syamkumar vs P.R.Sasi on 23 December, 2009","datePublished":"2009-12-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-04-10T20:21:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009"},"wordCount":954,"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\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009","name":"Syamkumar vs P.R.Sasi on 23 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-12-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-04-10T20:21:00+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/syamkumar-vs-p-r-sasi-on-23-december-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Syamkumar vs P.R.Sasi on 23 December, 2009"}]},{"@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\/61006","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=61006"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/61006\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=61006"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=61006"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=61006"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}