{"id":6644,"date":"2010-09-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-09-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010"},"modified":"2014-09-25T18:57:02","modified_gmt":"2014-09-25T13:27:02","slug":"joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010","title":{"rendered":"Joykutty vs Reghu on 22 September, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Joykutty vs Reghu on 22 September, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCrl.Rev.Pet.No. 2655 of 2010()\n\n\n1. JOYKUTTY, AGED 70 YEARS\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. REGHU, S\/O.GOPALAN\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. PODIYAN, S\/O.KANDAN\n\n3. RAVI, S\/O.GOPALAN\n\n4. RATHEESH, S\/O.SANTHA\n\n5. SARADHA, W\/O.REGHU\n\n6. JANAKI, W\/O.GOPALAN\n\n7. SARAMMA, W\/O.PODIYAN\n\n8. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN\n\n Dated :22\/09\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                        V.K.MOHANAN, J.\n                      -------------------------------\n                      Crl.R.P.No.2655 of 2010\n                      -------------------------------\n          Dated this the 22nd day of September, 2010.\n\n                             O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
     Challenge in this revision petition is against the order of<\/p>\n
acquittal recorded by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate-<\/p>\n
Pathanamthitta in C.C.No.98\/07.\n<\/p>\n
     2. C.C.No.98\/07 was instituted upon a report filed by the<\/p>\n
police after investigation in Crime No.136\/06 of Pathanamthitta<\/p>\n
Police Station, for the offence punishable u\/s.143, 147, 148, 447,<\/p>\n
427 and 506(ii) r\/w 149 of IPC. Altogether there were 8 accused<\/p>\n
and finally as per the judgment of the trial court except A4, all<\/p>\n
others were acquitted.        It is the above order of acquittal<\/p>\n
challenged in this revision petition at the instance of the defacto<\/p>\n
complainant.\n<\/p>\n
     3.   I have heard Adv.Sri.M.T.Suresh Kumar, the learned<\/p>\n
counsel for the revision petitioner and I have carefully perused<\/p>\n
the judgments of the learned Magistrate.\n<\/p>\n
     4. The case of the prosecution is that, on 15.1.2006 at<\/p>\n
about 12.00 in the mid night, the accused armed with deadly<\/p>\n
                                  2<\/span>
\nCrl.R.P.No.2655 of 2010<\/p>\n
weapons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and<\/p>\n
committed rioting and in pursuance of their common object,<\/p>\n
criminally trespassed upon the property of PW1 lying in Survey<\/p>\n
No.49\/2 situated at Puthenpeedika in Omalloor Village and<\/p>\n
committed mischief by demolishing the eastern boundary at a<\/p>\n
width of 1.5 m. and a length of 180 m. causing a loss of<\/p>\n
Rs.50,000\/- and that A1 criminally intimidated PW1 by showing<\/p>\n
a deadly knife causing fear of death and there by committed the<\/p>\n
said offences. During the trial Pws.1 to 3 were examined and<\/p>\n
Exts.P1 to P7 were marked from the side of the prosecution to<\/p>\n
prove its case. Ext.P1 is the complaint preferred by the defacto<\/p>\n
complainant, the revision petitioner herein. Ext.P2 is the certified<\/p>\n
copy of the settlement deed in favour of PW1, Exts.P3 and P4<\/p>\n
are respectively the possession certificate and tax receipt. PW2<\/p>\n
is the Sub Inspector of Police, Pathanathitta Police Station, who<\/p>\n
registered Ext.P5 FIR and conducted investigation. Ext.P6 is the<\/p>\n
scene mahazar and Ext.P7 is the report deleting A3 from the FIR<\/p>\n
and filing the full address of the other accused persons. Out of 3<\/p>\n
                                 3<\/span>
\nCrl.R.P.No.2655 of 2010<\/p>\n
witnesses shown as occurrence witnesses, only PW1 was<\/p>\n
examined and the daughter in law and the wife of PW1 did not<\/p>\n
turn up and adduced no evidence. After considering the above<\/p>\n
materials and evidence, the court found that the prosecution has<\/p>\n
failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and<\/p>\n
consequently the benefit of doubt is given in favour of the<\/p>\n
accused and they were acquitted.\n<\/p>\n
        5.      The learned counsel for the revision petitioner<\/p>\n
vehemently argued that though timely information was given to<\/p>\n
the police, no action was taken because of the influence of the<\/p>\n
original A3 and hence the defacto complainant was constrained<\/p>\n
to approach the court by filing a private complaint, it is thereafter<\/p>\n
the police registered the crime. According to the learned counsel,<\/p>\n
the learned Magistrate acquitted the accused on flimsy grounds<\/p>\n
and without serious consideration and appreciation of evidence<\/p>\n
on record. It is also the submission of the learned counsel that<\/p>\n
as per the scene mahazar, mischief is manifest but the trial court<\/p>\n
miserably failed to consider the above aspect.       It is also the<\/p>\n
                                 4<\/span>
\nCrl.R.P.No.2655 of 2010<\/p>\n
submission of the learned counsel that, other than the accused<\/p>\n
nobody is responsible for the mischief committed on the eastern<\/p>\n
boundary of the property of PW1.\n<\/p>\n
        6. I am unable to sustain the above contention. It is an<\/p>\n
admitted fact that there is a path way lying on the eastern side of<\/p>\n
the property and the said path way being constructed and<\/p>\n
maintained by the panchayat by putting concrete. The alleged<\/p>\n
incident was during the night and the trial court has found that it<\/p>\n
has come out in evidence that the defacto complainant PW1 has<\/p>\n
got poor eye sight for the last 21 years and he came nearly 51 ft.<\/p>\n
away from the eastern boundary. It is also the observation of the<\/p>\n
learned Magistrate that, PW1 has no case in Ext.P1 complaint<\/p>\n
that the accused had committed the mischief in the presence of<\/p>\n
light and no source of light was high-lighted by PW1 either in<\/p>\n
Ext.P1 complaint or in any other document produced before the<\/p>\n
Court. So the trial court held that it is not forthcoming as to how<\/p>\n
PW1 has witnessed the incident and identified the persons who<\/p>\n
allegedly standing 50 ft. away from the position where PW1 was<\/p>\n
                                    5<\/span>
\nCrl.R.P.No.2655 of 2010<\/p>\n
standing and that too in the mid night. So the trial court found<\/p>\n
that the identification made by PW1 before the court during the<\/p>\n
first time can not be accepted as such.\n<\/p>\n
        7. It is also the observation of the learned Magistrate that,<\/p>\n
there is no independent and corroborative evidence for the<\/p>\n
consideration of the evidence of PW1. It is also on record that,<\/p>\n
the path way in question leads to a colony wherein so many<\/p>\n
houses are situated and several families are living.          In the<\/p>\n
absence of any proper identification of the accused, who involved<\/p>\n
in the real incident and because the beneficiary of the path way<\/p>\n
is not only the accused, it can not be ruled out that, no other<\/p>\n
person has involved and hence it can not be held that the<\/p>\n
prosecution has proved the identity of the accused beyond<\/p>\n
reasonable doubt. It is also a fact that the incident was taken<\/p>\n
place during the night. The trial court has also found that the<\/p>\n
police has not made any effort to find out the weapons allegedly<\/p>\n
used by the accused.         The evidence of PW1 regarding the<\/p>\n
weapon and the persons who were possessing the weapon at<\/p>\n
                                   6<\/span>
\nCrl.R.P.No.2655 of 2010<\/p>\n
the time of the incident are not worthy because his only general<\/p>\n
version is that of the accused were holding deadly weapons. So<\/p>\n
the trial court after appreciating the evidence which are available<\/p>\n
on record held that, in the absence of any independent and<\/p>\n
corroborative evidence, the version of PW1 who is aged nearly<\/p>\n
50 years and especially when he had some visual defect and the<\/p>\n
distance between the place of occurrence and the witness stood<\/p>\n
at the time of the incident is too far, held that the prosecution has<\/p>\n
not proved the case beyond reasonable doubt. I find no reason to<\/p>\n
interfere with the above findings of the learned Magistrate.<\/p>\n
        8. It is also relevant to note that, though the above case<\/p>\n
was instituted upon the police report, the prosecution agency has<\/p>\n
not filed any appeal against the acquittal of the accused. While<\/p>\n
this court exercising the revisional jurisdiction at the instance of<\/p>\n
the defacto complainant \/ a private party, unless it is specifically<\/p>\n
shown that there is manifest error or miscarriage of justice or<\/p>\n
violation of procedure in law, this court is not expected to<\/p>\n
interfere with the order of acquittal recorded by the trial court. In<\/p>\n
                                   7<\/span>
\nCrl.R.P.No.2655 of 2010<\/p>\n
this revision petition, the revision petitioner has miserably failed<\/p>\n
to make out any of such ground to interfere with the order of<\/p>\n
acquittal.\n<\/p>\n
        In the result, I am of the view that this revision petition is<\/p>\n
devoid of any merit and accordingly the same is dismissed.<\/p>\n
                                                    V.K.MOHANAN,
\n                                                        Judge.\n<\/p>\n
ami\/<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Joykutty vs Reghu on 22 September, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 2655 of 2010() 1. JOYKUTTY, AGED 70 YEARS … Petitioner Vs 1. REGHU, S\/O.GOPALAN … Respondent 2. PODIYAN, S\/O.KANDAN 3. RAVI, S\/O.GOPALAN 4. RATHEESH, S\/O.SANTHA 5. SARADHA, W\/O.REGHU 6. JANAKI, W\/O.GOPALAN 7. SARAMMA, W\/O.PODIYAN 8. STATE […]<\/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-6644","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nJoykutty vs Reghu on 22 September, 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\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Joykutty vs Reghu on 22 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-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=\"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-09-25T13:27:02+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Joykutty vs Reghu on 22 September, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-09-25T13:27:02+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1196,\"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\\\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010\",\"name\":\"Joykutty vs Reghu on 22 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-09-25T13:27:02+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Joykutty vs Reghu on 22 September, 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":"Joykutty vs Reghu on 22 September, 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\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Joykutty vs Reghu on 22 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-09-25T13:27:02+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Joykutty vs Reghu on 22 September, 2010","datePublished":"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-09-25T13:27:02+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010"},"wordCount":1196,"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\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010","name":"Joykutty vs Reghu on 22 September, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-09-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-09-25T13:27:02+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/joykutty-vs-reghu-on-22-september-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Joykutty vs Reghu on 22 September, 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\/6644","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=6644"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6644\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6644"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6644"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6644"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}