{"id":64696,"date":"2010-03-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-03-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010"},"modified":"2016-10-22T06:34:03","modified_gmt":"2016-10-22T01:04:03","slug":"vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010","title":{"rendered":"========================================================= vs Mr Dc Sejpal on 29 March, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">========================================================= vs Mr Dc Sejpal on 29 March, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: H.B.Antani,&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\nSCA\/1249\/2010\t 3\/ 6\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 1249 of 2010\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI\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\nSIDDIKBHAI\nHAIDARBHAI MIYANA\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nCOMMISSIONER\nOF POLICE &amp; OTHERS\n \n\n=========================================================\nAppearance : \nMS\nJAYSHREE C BHATT for Petitioner. \nMR DC SEJPAL, ASST. GOVERNMENT\nPLEADER for\nRespondents. \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\n HONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 29\/03\/2010 \n\n \n\n \n ORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>\tBy<br \/>\nfiling this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of<br \/>\nIndia, the detenu has challenged the order of detention No.<br \/>\nPCB\/DTN\/PASA\/630\/2009 dated 05.10.2009 passed by the Police<br \/>\nCommissioner, Ahmedabad   City, respondent No.1, in exercise of<br \/>\npowers under sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Gujarat Prevention<br \/>\nof Anti Social Activities Act, 1985 [hereinafter referred to as the<br \/>\nPASA Act] detaining the detenu as a bootlegger, as being illegal,<br \/>\ninvalid, arbitrary, void ab-initio and suffers from total<br \/>\nnon-application of mind and also in violation of the provisions of<br \/>\nArticles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLearned<br \/>\nadvocate for the detenu, Ms. Jayshree Bhatt, submitted that the<br \/>\ngrounds of detention do not indicate any satisfaction recorded by the<br \/>\ndetaining authority that the activities of the detenu are detrimental<br \/>\nto public order, and, therefore, the detention order is bad and<br \/>\nillegal. She further submitted that the detaining authority has<br \/>\nplaced reliance on two offences registered against the detenu but the<br \/>\nsame do not indicate anything to support disturbance to  public<br \/>\norder .  She further submitted that even otherwise, in the first<br \/>\noffence, the quantity involved is only 19 Ltrs. of country liquor and<br \/>\nin the second offence, the quantity is only 12 Lrs. of country liquor<br \/>\nand 90 Ltrs. of Wash. She, therefore, submitted that even looking to<br \/>\nthe small quantity, the detention order deserves to be quashed and<br \/>\nset aside.  She further submitted that the last offence was<br \/>\nregistered against the detenu on 16.09.09 and in the said case, the<br \/>\ndetenu was released on bail on 17.09.09 but the detention order is<br \/>\npassed on 05.10.2009. Hence there is delay in passing the order of<br \/>\ndetention and therefore also, the detention order is liable to be<br \/>\nquashed and set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tMr.\n<\/p>\n<p>Sejpal, learned AGP submitted that the detention order is just and<br \/>\nproper and detaining authority has passed the order after considering<br \/>\nall relevant aspects of the matter, and the same needs no<br \/>\ninterference.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tHeard<br \/>\nlearned advocate Ms. Jayshree Bhatt for the detenu and Mr. Sejpal,<br \/>\nlearned AGP for the respondents. I have also perused the records.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt<br \/>\nappears that on the basis of two cases, both registered at Madhavpura<br \/>\nPolice Station, viz. Prohibition CR No. 5119\/09 dated 29.05.2009 for<br \/>\n19 ltrs. of country liquor and Prohibition CR No. 5158\/2009 dated<br \/>\n16.09.09 for 12 ltrs. of country liquor and 90 Ltrs. of Wash against<br \/>\nthe detenu, the detaining authority held that the said activities of<br \/>\nselling country made liquor of the present detenu were harmful to the<br \/>\nhealth of the public, and to restrain from carrying further illegal<br \/>\nactivities, the detenu has been detained. It appears from the order<br \/>\nthat the activities of the detenu cannot be said to be disturbing the<br \/>\n public order .  It also appears from the order passed by the<br \/>\ndetaining authority that  grounds which are mentioned in the order<br \/>\nare in reference to the situation of  law and order  and not<br \/>\n public order .\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt<br \/>\nappears that the last offence was registered on 16.09.2009, the<br \/>\ndetenu was released on bail on 17.09.09 and the detention order was<br \/>\npassed on 05.10.2009   almost 18 days after his release. Hence<br \/>\nthere is a delay in passing the order of detention. No affidavit is<br \/>\nfiled in this matter by any of the respondents.  The delay caused in<br \/>\npassing the order of detention has thus remained unexplained. On this<br \/>\nground alone, this petition requires to be allowed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThat<br \/>\napart, except the statements of some anonymous witnesses, there is no<br \/>\nmaterial on record which shows that the detenu is carrying on<br \/>\nactivities of selling country made liquor which is harmful to the<br \/>\nhealth of the public. In the case of Ashokbhai Jivraj @ <a href=\"\/doc\/687998\/\">Jivabhai<br \/>\nSolanki v. Police Commissioner, Surat<\/a> [(2001) (1) GLH 393), having<br \/>\nconsidered the decision of the Hon&#8217;ble Apex Court in the case of Ram<br \/>\nManohar Lohia v. State of Bihar (AIR 1966 SC 740), this Court held as<br \/>\nunder in paragraphs 22:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t So<br \/>\nfar as the cases against the detenu are concerned, they have already<br \/>\nbeen registered.  They were against persons mentioned therein which<br \/>\nis stated in the grounds of detention by the detaining authority.<br \/>\nRegarding two statements having taken into account, the law laid down<br \/>\nby the Supreme Court in Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar, AIR 1966<br \/>\nSC 740 and reiterated from time to time including decisions referred<br \/>\nto by us hereinabove, the case falls under the maintenance of  law<br \/>\nand order  and not  public order .  The subjective satisfaction<br \/>\narrived at by the detaining authority, therefore, cannot be said to<br \/>\nbe legal, valid and in accordance with law. Since in the facts and<br \/>\ncircumstances, an order of detention could have been passed by the<br \/>\ndetaining authority for maintenance of  public order , the order<br \/>\ndeserves to be quashed and is hereby set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn<br \/>\nthe case of <a href=\"\/doc\/271008\/\">Collector and Dist. Magistrate v. S. Sultan<\/a>  reported in<br \/>\nAIR 2008 SUPREME COURT 2096 the Apex Court held as under:-\n<\/p>\n<p> The<br \/>\ncrucial issue, therefore, is whether the activities of the detenu<br \/>\nwere prejudicial to public order. While the expression &#8216;law and<br \/>\norder&#8217; is wider in scope inasmuch as contravention of law always<br \/>\naffects order. &#8216;Public order&#8217; has a narrower ambit, and public order<br \/>\ncould be affected by only such contravention which affects the<br \/>\ncommunity or the public at large. Public order is the even tempo of<br \/>\nlife of the community taking the country as a whole or even a<br \/>\nspecified locality. The distinction between the areas of &#8216;law and<br \/>\norder&#8217; and &#8216;public order&#8217; is one of the degree and extent of the<br \/>\nreach of the act in question on society. It is the potentiality of<br \/>\nthe act to disturb the even tempo of life of the community which<br \/>\nmakes it prejudicial to the maintenance of the public order. If a<br \/>\ncontravention in its effect is confined only to a few individuals<br \/>\ndirectly involved as distinct from a wide spectrum of public, it<br \/>\ncould raise problem of law and order only. It is the length,<br \/>\nmagnitude and intensity of the terror wave unleashed by a particular<br \/>\neruption of disorder that helps to distinguish it as an act affecting<br \/>\n&#8216;public order&#8217; from that concerning &#8216;law and order&#8217;. The question to<br \/>\nask is : &#8220;Does it lead to disturbance of the current life of the<br \/>\ncommunity so as to amount to a disturbance of the public order or<br \/>\ndoes it affect merely an individual leaving the tranquillity of the<br \/>\nsociety undisturbed&#8221; ? This question has to be faced in every<br \/>\ncase on its facts.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.<br \/>\n&#8220;Public order&#8221; is what the French call &#8216;ordre publique&#8217; and<br \/>\nis something more than ordinary maintenance of law and order. The<br \/>\ntest to be adopted in determining whether an act affects law and<br \/>\norder or public order, is : Does it lead to disturbance of the<br \/>\ncurrent life of the community so as to amount to disturbance of the<br \/>\npublic order or does it affect merely an individual leaving the<br \/>\ntranquillity of the society undisturbed ? <a href=\"\/doc\/1378263\/\">(See Kanu Biswas v. State<br \/>\nof West Bengal (AIR<\/a> 1972 SC 1656).\n<\/p>\n<p>\tApplying<br \/>\nthe ratio of the above decisions, it is clear that before passing an<br \/>\norder of detention of a detenu, the detaining authority must come to<br \/>\na definite finding that there is threat to the  public order  and<br \/>\nit is very clear that the present case would not fall within the<br \/>\ncategory of threat to  public order .  Even looking to the small<br \/>\nquantity, the detention order deserves to be quashed and set aside.<br \/>\nIn that view of the matter, when the order of detention has been<br \/>\npassed by the detaining authority without having adequate grounds for<br \/>\npassing the said order, it cannot be sustained and, therefore, it<br \/>\ndeserves to be quashed and set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe<br \/>\npetition is allowed. The impugned order of detention dated 05.10.2009<br \/>\npassed by the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad  City, respondent No.1<br \/>\nagainst  the detenu is hereby quashed and set  aside.   The detenu is<br \/>\nordered to be set at liberty forthwith,  if  not  required  in  any<br \/>\nother case.    Rule is made absolute accordingly.  Direct service is<br \/>\npermitted.\n<\/p>\n<pre>mathew\t\t\t\t\t[\nH.B. ANTANI, J.]\n \n\n \n \n\n\n\n    \n\n \n\t   \n      \n      \n\t    \n\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\n\t   \n      \n\t  \t    \n\t\t   Top\n\t   \n      \n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court ========================================================= vs Mr Dc Sejpal on 29 March, 2010 Author: H.B.Antani,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/1249\/2010 3\/ 6 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1249 of 2010 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may [&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-64696","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>========================================================= vs Mr Dc Sejpal on 29 March, 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\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"========================================================= vs Mr Dc Sejpal on 29 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-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=\"2010-03-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-22T01:04:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"========================================================= vs Mr Dc Sejpal on 29 March, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-22T01:04:03+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1320,\"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\\\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010\",\"name\":\"========================================================= vs Mr Dc Sejpal on 29 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-22T01:04:03+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"========================================================= vs Mr Dc Sejpal on 29 March, 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":"========================================================= vs Mr Dc Sejpal on 29 March, 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\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"========================================================= vs Mr Dc Sejpal on 29 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-03-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-22T01:04:03+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"========================================================= vs Mr Dc Sejpal on 29 March, 2010","datePublished":"2010-03-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-22T01:04:03+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010"},"wordCount":1320,"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\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010","name":"========================================================= vs Mr Dc Sejpal on 29 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-03-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-22T01:04:03+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vs-mr-dc-sejpal-on-29-march-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"========================================================= vs Mr Dc Sejpal on 29 March, 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\/64696","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=64696"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/64696\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=64696"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=64696"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=64696"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}