{"id":6353,"date":"2010-11-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-11-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010"},"modified":"2018-04-04T07:08:59","modified_gmt":"2018-04-04T01:38:59","slug":"manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010","title":{"rendered":"Manish vs The on 29 November, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Manish vs The on 29 November, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&amp;Nbsp;<\/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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/1858\/2008\t 6\/ 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. 1858 of 2008\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED\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 be\n\t\t\treferred 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\nMANISH\nVIRENDRASINH YADAV - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nMJ BUDDHBHATTI for\nAppellant(s) : 1,MR JM BUDDHBHATTI for Appellant(s) : 1, \nMR HL\nJANI Ld. APP for Opponent(s) :\n1, \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 Z.K.SAIYED\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 29\/11\/2010 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>1.\tThe<br \/>\npresent appellant has preferred this appeal under sec. 374(2) of the<br \/>\nCode of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment and order of<br \/>\nconviction and sentence  dated 17.6.2008 passed by the learned<br \/>\nPresiding Officer, FTC No. 4, Gondal, camp at Jetpur in Sessions Case<br \/>\nNo. 81\/2007, whereby, the learned Judge has convicted the appellant<br \/>\nunder sec. 397 of IPC and sentenced to undergo R\/I for 7 years and to<br \/>\npay a fine of Rs. 5000\/-, in default, to undergo further S\/I for one<br \/>\nyear. The appellant is also convicted under sec. 25(1)(B)(A) of Arms<br \/>\nAct and sentenced to undergo R\/I  of 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs.<br \/>\n2000\/-, in default, to undergo further S\/I for three months. The<br \/>\nappellant is also convicted under sec. 27(1) of the Arms Act and<br \/>\nsentenced to undergo R\/I for a period of three years and to pay a<br \/>\nfine of Rs 3000\/-, in default, to undergo further S\/I for six months,<br \/>\nwhich is impugned in this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe<br \/>\nbrief facts of the prosecution case is as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tIt<br \/>\nis the case of the complainant that he was serving in the firm of<br \/>\nIshwardas Bechardas, at Veraval and the main office of the said firm<br \/>\nis situated at Rajkot and, therefore, since last two years, he was<br \/>\ndoing the delivery work of parcel from Veraval to Rajkot. That, on<br \/>\n17.1.2007, at about 6.45 pm, he went to Bus Stand at Veraval by<br \/>\nrickshaw for going to Rajkot for delivery of parcels of the firm.<br \/>\nFrom the ST Bus Station, Veraval, he went to Rajkot in Una-Rajkot ST<br \/>\nbus along with three parcels and he also received one parcel from<br \/>\nKeshod, what was there in the said parcel that he was not knowing.<br \/>\nWhen the said  bus reached between Jetalsar and Jetpur, at about 9.45<br \/>\npm in the night,  he was sleeping and   at that time, one person came<br \/>\nthere and gave blow on his hand and therefore, he woke-up and saw<br \/>\nthat one person had taken the parcels and one person was stopping the<br \/>\nbus by standing behind the driver, whereas, third one was standing<br \/>\nnear the conductor, to whom, the person standing near me had thrown<br \/>\nthe parcels towards that person and he took away the said parcels and<br \/>\nwhen bus stopped, then all the three persons got down from the bus<br \/>\nand ran away. Along with the parcels of complainant, the said persons<br \/>\nhave also taken away the parcels of firm Mahendra Somabhai, firm<br \/>\nSomabhai Kanchanlal of Veraval and one mobile of Nokia make from the<br \/>\nperson of firm Arvind Kanti, worth Rs. 1500 bearing mobile No.<br \/>\n9979197203. The complainant was not knowing how much money was there<br \/>\nin the parcels.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tTherefore<br \/>\na complaint came to be filed by the complainant before the Jetpur<br \/>\nTaluka Police Station. The panchnama of the scene of offence place<br \/>\nwas prepared in the presence of panch witness and statements of<br \/>\nother witnesses were recorded and on completion of the investigation,<br \/>\ncharge-sheet was filed in the Court of learned JMFC, Jetpur.<br \/>\nThereafter, as the case was exclusively triable by the Court of<br \/>\nSessions, the learned Magistrate has committed the case to the Court<br \/>\nof Sessions, which was given number as Sessions Case No. 81\/2007.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tThereafter,<br \/>\nthe charge was framed at Ex. 4 against the appellant. The appellant<br \/>\naccused has pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tIn<br \/>\norder to bring the home the charge levelled against the appellant-<br \/>\naccused, the prosecution has examined the witnesses and also produced<br \/>\ndocumentary evidence before the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tThereafter,<br \/>\nafter examining the witnesses, further statement of the<br \/>\nappellant-accused under sec. 313 of CrPC was recorded in which the<br \/>\nappellant-accused has denied the case of the prosecution.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tAfter<br \/>\nconsidering the oral as well as documentary evidence and after<br \/>\nhearing the parties, learned Judge vide impugned judgment and order<br \/>\ndated 17.6.2008 held the appellant   accused guilty to the charge<br \/>\nlevelled against him under sec.25(1)(B)(A) and 27(1) of the Arms Act<br \/>\nand convicted and sentenced the appellant accused, as stated above.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tBeing<br \/>\naggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order of<br \/>\nconviction and sentence passed by the learned Presiding Officer,FTC<br \/>\nNo. 4, Gondal camp at Jetpur, the present appellant has preferred<br \/>\nthis appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tHeard<br \/>\nMr. MJ Buddhbhatti learned advocate for the appellant and Mr HL Jani<br \/>\nlearned APP for the respondent-State.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tMr<br \/>\nBhuddhbhatti learned advocate for the appellant has  read the oral<br \/>\nevidence of PW-1 to PW-13 and argued that material witnesses of the<br \/>\nprosecution have turned hostile. So, the  panchnama which is an<br \/>\nimportant piece of evidence in this case has not been proved beyond<br \/>\nreasonable doubt. Mr. Buddhbhatti learned advocate has also read the<br \/>\noral  evidence of PW-14 Nitinbhai Mafatlal Patel Ex. 39 and argued<br \/>\nthat  he was not an eye witness and therefore,  simply his evidence<br \/>\ncan be considered as hear-say evidence. He has also read the oral<br \/>\nevidence of PW-15 Hitendrasinh Baluji Rajput Ex. 44 and argued that,<br \/>\nno doubt, from the oral evidence of this witness, it appears that<br \/>\nthis witness has deposed before the trial Court that he is the<br \/>\nwitness of TI Parade and the accused was identified by him, but he<br \/>\nhas read the cross examination of this witness and argued that some<br \/>\naccused were shown by the Investigating Agency to the witness and<br \/>\ntherefore, the evidence of this witness cannot be said to be<br \/>\ntrustworthy, reliable and acceptable. Mr. Buddhbhatti has also read<br \/>\nthe oral evidence of PW-16 Hirendragiri Babugiri Goswami Ex. 45 and<br \/>\nargued that in cross-examination, this witness has fully admitted<br \/>\nthat the accused was shown by the Investigating Agency to him and,<br \/>\ntherefore, the evidence of this witness is also not trustworthy,<br \/>\nreliable and acceptable. Mr Buddhbhatti also read the oral evidence<br \/>\nof PW-17 Pithabhai Ranmalbhai Jadav Ex. 46 and argued that this<br \/>\nwitness is also not an eye witness, so his evidence cannot be<br \/>\nconsidered and identification parade was not carried out by the<br \/>\nprosecution through this witness also. Mr Buddbhatti has also read<br \/>\nthe oral evidence of PW-18 Bhupendrasinh Pravinsinh Bhati Ex. 47,<br \/>\nPW-20 Babubhai Chothabhai Gohel Ex. 50 and argued that through the<br \/>\nevidence of these witnesses, the prosecution has not proved its case.<br \/>\nMr Buddhbhatti has also read the cross-examination of these witnesses<br \/>\nand contended that the prosecution has not established the<br \/>\nidentification of the present appellant beyond reasonable doubt. Mr<br \/>\nBuddhbhatti has also argued that from the oral evidence of the star<br \/>\nwitness PW-21 M.A. Jagani, Executive Magistrate Ex. 51, the<br \/>\nprosecution has failed to prove dummies who have been called by the<br \/>\nExecutive Magistrate. He has also argued that it is mandatory for the<br \/>\nprosecution to establish the out-look of the dummies should be<br \/>\nsimilar  as per the out-look of the present appellant. So, Mr<br \/>\nBuddhbhatti has contended that when the prosecution has failed to<br \/>\nprove the case through the oral evidence of the witnesses who turned<br \/>\nhostile before the trial Court then only the oral evidence of<br \/>\nExecutive Magistrate is required to be considered and when the<br \/>\nmandatory provision is not followed by the Executive Magistrate,<br \/>\nthen the prosecution is required to prove its case beyond reasonable<br \/>\ndoubt. In that view of the matter, Mr Buddhbhatti learned advocate<br \/>\nhas prayed to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order of<br \/>\nconviction and sentence.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\tAs<br \/>\nagainst this, learned APP Mr HL Jani has vehemently argued that the<br \/>\npresent appellant is involved in a serious offence and identification<br \/>\nis also established but suppose the out-look of the dummy is not as<br \/>\nper the norms as laid down by the Apex Court, then, looking to the<br \/>\nseriousness of the offence, the impugned judgment and order of<br \/>\nconviction and sentence requires to be confirmed.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.\tI<br \/>\nhave gone through the oral as well as documentary evidence produced<br \/>\non the record. I have read the oral evidence of prosecution witnesses<br \/>\nand also perused the charge framed against the appellant and also<br \/>\nconsidered the submissions of both the parties. It is true that 13<br \/>\npanch witnesses  have been examined by the prosecution in this case<br \/>\nbut none has supported the contents of the panchnama and they have<br \/>\nbeen  declared hostile. It is also true that the prosecution has only<br \/>\nrelied upon the oral evidence of the Executive Magistrate and panchas<br \/>\nof panchnama of TI Parade. I have perused the contents of the<br \/>\npanchnama and also compared it with the oral evidence of Executive<br \/>\nMagistrate. In examination-in-chief and cross-examination, the<br \/>\nExecutive Magistrate has never explained that through whom dummies<br \/>\nand panchas were called by him. Even from the oral evidence of the<br \/>\npanchas witnesses also, it appears that when the accused is shown by<br \/>\nthe police to the panch witness, then, it cannot be said that the<br \/>\nprosecution has proved panchnama beyond reasonable doubt. I have<br \/>\nfound from the oral as well as documentary evidence that the<br \/>\nprosecution has failed to prove the identity of the present appellant<br \/>\nand the learned Judge has committed grave error in convicting and<br \/>\nsentencing the present appellant. In view of above, the impugned<br \/>\njudgment and order of conviction and sentence requires to be quashed<br \/>\nand set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>14.\tIn<br \/>\nthe result, this appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order<br \/>\nof conviction and sentence dated 17.6.2008 passed in Sessions Case<br \/>\nNo. 81\/2007 is quashed and set aside. The appellant is hereby<br \/>\nacquitted from the charges levelled against him. Bail bond, if any,<br \/>\nstands cancelled. R &amp; P to be sent back to the trial Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>(Z.K.\n<\/p>\n<p>SAIYED, J)<\/p>\n<p>mandora\/<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Manish vs The on 29 November, 2010 Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/1858\/2008 6\/ 8 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1858 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6353","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 v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Manish vs The on 29 November, 2010 - 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\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Manish vs The on 29 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-11-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-04-04T01:38:59+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\\\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Manish vs The on 29 November, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-04T01:38:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1579,\"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\\\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010\",\"name\":\"Manish vs The on 29 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-11-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-04-04T01:38:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Manish vs The on 29 November, 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":"Manish vs The on 29 November, 2010 - 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\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Manish vs The on 29 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-11-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-04-04T01:38:59+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\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Manish vs The on 29 November, 2010","datePublished":"2010-11-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-04T01:38:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010"},"wordCount":1579,"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\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010","name":"Manish vs The on 29 November, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-11-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-04-04T01:38:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/manish-vs-the-on-29-november-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Manish vs The on 29 November, 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\/6353","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=6353"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6353\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6353"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6353"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6353"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}