{"id":68819,"date":"2007-09-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-09-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007"},"modified":"2015-02-06T04:51:31","modified_gmt":"2015-02-05T23:21:31","slug":"a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007","title":{"rendered":"A.M.Moideen vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 19 September, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
A.M.Moideen vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 19 September, 2007<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(Crl) No. 193 of 2007(S)\n\n\n1. A.M.MOIDEEN, S\/O.MARAKKAR,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DISTRICT\n\n3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL PRISON,\n\n4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.O.V.MANIPRASAD\n\n                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR\n\n Dated :19\/09\/2007\n\n O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
            K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ.\n<\/p>\n
            ——————————————————————————–\n<\/p>\n
                            Writ Petition (Crl) No.193 of 2007-S\n<\/p>\n
            ——————————————————————————–\n<\/p>\n
                                             Judgment<\/p>\n
Balakrishnan Nair, J.\n<\/p>\n
       The petitioner is the father of Mr.A.M.Ummer, who has been detained<\/p>\n
under the provisions of the Kerala Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Ordinance<\/p>\n
2007 (Ordinance No.30\/07), by order dated 19.06.2007 of the second<\/p>\n
respondent District Magistrate. The brief facts of the case are the following :<\/p>\n
       2. The allegation against Mr.A.M.Ummer, who is hereinafter referred to<\/p>\n
as the detenu, is that he is indulging in illegal mining and transporting of river<\/p>\n
sand from Bharathapuzha river. In other words, he is a depradator of<\/p>\n
environment. So, the District Magistrate issued Ext.P1 detention order dated<\/p>\n
19.06.2007 and in execution of that order, the detenu was arrested and he is<\/p>\n
suffering incarceration from the said date onwards. Ext.P2, which contains the<\/p>\n
grounds of detention, was also served on him, along with Ext.P1. Ext.P1 order<\/p>\n
of detention was confirmed by the Government by Ext.P4 order dated<\/p>\n
29.06.2007. There was a mistake in the said order, in which, the petitioner was<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07                  -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
described as a “Known Rowdi”, instead of “Known Goonda”. The said mistake<\/p>\n
was corrected by issuing Ext.P5 order dated 16.07.2007. The detenu filed<\/p>\n
Ext.P7 representation before the Advisory Board, constituted under the Act. He<\/p>\n
submitted that he knew about the consideration of his case by the Advisory<\/p>\n
Board, only when the said Board visited the prison to hear the detenu. The<\/p>\n
said representation was followed by Ext.P8 representation before the<\/p>\n
Government by the detenue and Ext.P9 representation by the petitioner and<\/p>\n
the wife of the detenu. The Government replied to Ext.P9 by Ext.P10, stating<\/p>\n
that the representation under the Ordinance No.30\/2007 can be filed only by<\/p>\n
the detenu and not by his relatives. In the above background, this Writ Petition<\/p>\n
is filed, praying for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus for the production of<\/p>\n
the detenu before this Court and to set him at liberty.\n<\/p>\n
        3. The petitioner attacks the detention of his son on various grounds.<\/p>\n
The following irregularities are pointed out against the detention order :-<\/p>\n
1) The District Magistrate, as evident from the impugned order, acted on the<\/p>\n
report of the SI of Police and not on the report of the District Superintendent of<\/p>\n
Police. The District Superintendent only forwarded the report of the SI of Police<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07                 -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
to the District Magistrate.\n<\/p>\n
2) Several documents are seen relied on in the impugned order, the copies of<\/p>\n
which were not served on him.\n<\/p>\n
3) The detention order as well as the grounds of detention was in English and<\/p>\n
therefore, he was disabled from filing an effective representation.<\/p>\n
4) The Government should have passed the confirmation order within 10 days.<\/p>\n
In this case, the initial confirmation order Ext.P4 is a void order, as the<\/p>\n
Government proceeded on the footing that the detenu is a “Rowdi”. The<\/p>\n
second confirmation order was passed after the above said time limit. So, the<\/p>\n
confirmation was never validly made. There is total non-application of mind<\/p>\n
from the part of the Government in issuing the confirmation order.<\/p>\n
       4. Apart from the above procedural improprieties, it is also contented<\/p>\n
that the detenu has not been found guilty for the violation of Section 4(1A) of<\/p>\n
the Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957. So, his case is<\/p>\n
not covered by the first limb of Section 2(o) of Ordinance No.30\/07, defining a<\/p>\n
“Known Goonda”. Therefore, the detention order suffers from this substantive<\/p>\n
invalidity also, it is submitted.\n<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07                -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
      5. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit, dealing with the<\/p>\n
contentions of the petitioner in the Writ Petition. According to them, the<\/p>\n
detention order has been validly made. The SI of police only forwarded the<\/p>\n
report to the District Superintendent of Police, who, in turn, applied his mind<\/p>\n
and submitted a report in terms of the provisions of the Act before the District<\/p>\n
Magistrate, who relied upon it and passed the impugned order. Similarly, the<\/p>\n
other procedural improprieties pointed out by the petitioner are also met in the<\/p>\n
counter affidavit. Regarding the substantive challenge also, the respondents<\/p>\n
have given their explanation. According to them, the detenu pleaded guilty to<\/p>\n
the charges of violation of Section 4(1A) of the Mines and Mineral<\/p>\n
(Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. So, the detenu clearly comes under<\/p>\n
the definition of “Known Goonda” and therefore, the detention order is validly<\/p>\n
made. The respondents have also produced copies of Exts.P1 and P2, in<\/p>\n
which the detenu has made an endorsement to the effect that the order and<\/p>\n
the grounds of detention were read over and explained to him in Malayalam<\/p>\n
and that he understood them. Therefore, the respondents pray for dismissal of<\/p>\n
the Writ Petition.\n<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07                 -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
      6. We heard the learned counsel Shri.O.V.Maniprasad, for the petitioner<\/p>\n
and the learned Special Government Pleader                  and Laison Officer<\/p>\n
Shri.K.K.Ravindranath, on behalf of the respondents. Before going into the<\/p>\n
procedural improprieties in the proceedings of the second respondent, we<\/p>\n
would first consider the substantive ground raised by the writ petitioner that the<\/p>\n
detenu has not been found guilty by any competent Court or authority, for an<\/p>\n
offence mentioned in Section 2(j) of the Ordinance and therefore, he cannot be<\/p>\n
treated as a “Known Goonda” under Section 2(o) of the Ordinance No.30\/2007<\/p>\n
(hereinafter referred to as the Goonda Ordinance). For convenient reference,<\/p>\n
we think, it will be helpful to extract the relevant provisions of the above said<\/p>\n
Ordinance. Section 2(j) reads as follows :\n<\/p>\n
              “Goonda means and includesa person who indulgesin or<\/p>\n
              promotes or abetsillegalactivitieswhich are,directlyor<\/p>\n
              indirectly, prejudicial to themaintenanceof publicorder<\/p>\n
              and includes a bootlegger,a counterfeiter,a depredatorof<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07              -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
           environment,a digitaldata and copy rightpirate,a drug<\/p>\n
           offender,a Hawalaracketeer,a hiredruffian,an immoral<\/p>\n
           trafficoffender,a loansharkora propertygrabber.     ”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
The circumstances, under which a “Goonda” can be treated as a “Known<\/p>\n
Goonda” are given in Section 2(o), which reads as follows :<\/p>\n
           “Known Goonda means a goonda,who had been,foracts<\/p>\n
           donewithintheprevioussevenyearsas calculatedfrom the<\/p>\n
           dateoftheorderimposinganyrestrictionordetentionunder<\/p>\n
           thisOrdinance:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           (i)foundguilty,by a competentCourtorauthority,atleast<\/p>\n
           onceforan offencewithinthemeaningoftheterm’goonda’<\/p>\n
           asdefinedinclause(j)ofSection2;or<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
           (ii)found in any investigationor enquiryby a competent<\/p>\n
           policeofficeror othercompetentauthority,on complaints<\/p>\n
           initiatedby persons other than police officers,in two<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07                -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
              separateinstancesnotformingpartofthesame transaction,<\/p>\n
              committedanyactwithinthemeaningoftheterm ‘goonda’<\/p>\n
              asdefinedinclause(j)ofSection2.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
A “Known Goonda” can be detained under Section 3(1) by the Government or<\/p>\n
an Officer, authorised by the Government under Sub-section (2) of Section 3. It<\/p>\n
is not in dispute that the District Magistrate, the second respondent herein is<\/p>\n
an authorised Officer under Section 3(2). Sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 3<\/p>\n
read as follows:\n<\/p>\n
              “Powertomake orders,detainingKnown Goondasand Known<\/p>\n
              Rowdies-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
              (1) The Governmentor an Officerauthorisedundersub-<\/p>\n
              section(2)may,ifsatisfiedon informationreceivedfrom a<\/p>\n
              PoliceOfficernotbelowthe rankof a Superintendentof<\/p>\n
              PolicewithregardtotheactivitiesofanyKnown Goondaor<\/p>\n
              Known Rowdy, that with a viewtopreventingsuchperson<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07               -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
            from indulginginanyanti-socialactivity,withintheStateof<\/p>\n
            Keralainany manner,itisnecessaryso to do,make an<\/p>\n
            order,directingthatsuchpersonbedetained.<\/p>\n
            (2)Ifhavingregardtothecircumstancesprevailingorlikely<\/p>\n
            toprevailinanyarea,theGovernment,ifsatisfiedthatitis<\/p>\n
            necessaryso to do,may, by orderin writing,directthat<\/p>\n
            during suchperiodas may be specifiedinthesaidorder,<\/p>\n
            the DistrictMagistratehavingjurisdictionmay exercisethe<\/p>\n
            powersundersub-section(1)inrespectofpersonsresiding<\/p>\n
            withinhisjurisdictionor inrespectofany personwho has<\/p>\n
            beenactingorisabouttoact,againstpublicsafety,order<\/p>\n
            andpeacewithinsuchjurisdiction.      ”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
On being satisfied as contemplated under Sub-section (1) quoted above, a<\/p>\n
Known Goonda can be detained by the second respondent. It is the case of<\/p>\n
the respondents that the detenu is treated as a Known Goonda under the first<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07               -9-<\/span><\/p>\n
limb of Section 2(o). The petitioner submits that the detenu was never found<\/p>\n
guilty by any competent Court or authority, during the previous seven years<\/p>\n
from the date of Ext.P1. The allegation against him is that he has committed<\/p>\n
the offence under Section 4(IA) of the Mines & Minerals (Development &<\/p>\n
Regulation) Act, 1957. The said provision reads as follows :<\/p>\n
             “No person shall transport or store or cause to be<\/p>\n
             transported or stored any mineral otherwise than in<\/p>\n
             accordancewiththe provisionsof thisAct and the rules<\/p>\n
             madethereunder.    ”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Going by Ext.P1, the 2nd respondent proceeded on the footing that the<\/p>\n
detenu has been found guilty by the SI of          Police, Chelakkara, under<\/p>\n
Section 4(1A),   read with Section 21(1) of the said Act and a fine of<\/p>\n
Rs.20,000\/- has been imposed on          him    on    21.03.2005.   Similarly,<\/p>\n
he has been found guilty by          the SI of Police, Chelakkara and fined<\/p>\n
on   27.03.2006,   06.11.2006,    19.02.2007,  20.03.2007    and 04.05.2007.<\/p>\n
Again, he has been found guilty and ordered to            pay fine by the SI<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07                 -10-<\/span><\/p>\n
of Police, Cheruthuruthy on 05.01.2007 and 17.03.2007 under the<\/p>\n
aforementioned provisions of the above said Act. The learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
petitioner points out that the SI of Police is not competent to impose any fine<\/p>\n
for transporting river sand. In support of that submission, reliance is placed on<\/p>\n
Ext.P6 Judgment of the Division Bench of this Court. He also points out that<\/p>\n
only a competent Court can find a person guilty. The SI of Police is not a<\/p>\n
competent authority, who can hold that the detenu is guilty. Therefore, the<\/p>\n
jurisdictional preconditions for ordering detention are not present in this case.<\/p>\n
In other words, he cannot be treated as a “Known Goonda” and therefore, the<\/p>\n
detention order is bad. The learned Special Government Pleader, on the other<\/p>\n
hand, referred to Section 23A of the Mines & Minerals (Development &<\/p>\n
Regulation) Act, 1957, which authorises the compounding of offences by<\/p>\n
officers, who are authorised under Section 22 of the Act, to file complaints<\/p>\n
before the court concerning the commission of offences under the provisions of<\/p>\n
the Act. Section 22 of the above said Act reads as follows :<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07       -11-<\/span><\/p>\n
            “Cognizanceofoffences:- No courtshalltakecognizanceof<\/p>\n
            any offencepunishableunderthisAct or any rulesmade<\/p>\n
            thereunderexcept upon complaintin writingmade by a<\/p>\n
            personauthorisedinthisbehalfbytheCentralGovernmentor<\/p>\n
            theStateGovernment.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Section 23A, concerning compounding of offence reads as follows :<\/p>\n
            (1)AnyoffencepunishableunderthisActoranyrulemade<\/p>\n
            thereundermay,eitherbeforeoraftertheinstitutionofthe<\/p>\n
            prosecution,be compoundedby thepersonauthorisedunder<\/p>\n
            section22 tomake a complainttothecourtwithrespectto<\/p>\n
            thatoffence,on paymentto thatperson,forcreditto the<\/p>\n
            Governmentofsuchsum asthatpersonmay specify:<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                  Providedthatinthecaseofanoffencepunishablewith<\/p>\n
            fineonly,no suchsum shallexceedthemaximum amountof<\/p>\n
            finewhichmay beimposedforthatoffence.<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07                 -12-<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
              2) Wherean offenceiscompoundedundersub-section(1),<\/p>\n
              no proceedingor furtherproceeding,as thecase may be,<\/p>\n
              shallbe takenagainsttheoffenderinrespectoftheoffence<\/p>\n
              so compounded and the offender,ifin custody,shallbe<\/p>\n
              releasedforthwith  .”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
The learned counsel for the        respondents made special reference to the<\/p>\n
notification issued under SRO 827\/91, published in the Kerala gazette Extra<\/p>\n
Ordinary No.796 dated 26.06.1991. It is a notification issued under Section 22<\/p>\n
of the above said Act, authorising various Officers to file complaints before the<\/p>\n
courts concerned, so that they can take cognizance as contemplated under<\/p>\n
Section 22 quoted above. Serial No.3 of the said notification refers to Police<\/p>\n
Officers of and above the rank of SI of Police in the State. They have been<\/p>\n
authorised to file complaints within their respective areas of jurisdiction. By<\/p>\n
virtue of that notification, the SI of Police can compound the offences under<\/p>\n
Section 23A. It is pointed out that in all these cases, the detenu pleaded<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07                -13-<\/span><\/p>\n
guilty before the police and the offences were compounded by imposing a<\/p>\n
penalty in accordance with law. Therefore, it should be treated that in all these<\/p>\n
cases, the detenu has been found guilty by the SI of Police, for the purpose of<\/p>\n
the first limb of Section 2(o), defining a “Known Goonda”. So, the detention<\/p>\n
order is valid, it is submitted.\n<\/p>\n
       7. We notice that the maximum penalty provided under the provisions of<\/p>\n
the above said Act for the offence under Section 4(1A) is imprisonment for a<\/p>\n
term, which may extend to two years or with fine, which may extend to<\/p>\n
Rs.25,000\/- or both. So, going by Part II of the schedule to the Code of<\/p>\n
Criminal Procedure, which deals with offences, under other enactments other<\/p>\n
than IPC, the violation of Section 4(1A) of the Mines & Minerals (Development<\/p>\n
& Regulation) Act is a non-cognizable offence. The result is that the Police<\/p>\n
cannot register any crime based on the information lodged, conduct<\/p>\n
investigation and file report under Section 173 of the Cr.PC. If the offence is<\/p>\n
committed in the presence of the Police, the Officer concerned can file a<\/p>\n
complaint before the court concerned. If the offender agrees, the offence can<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07                 -14-<\/span><\/p>\n
be compounded also. In this case, the case of the respondents is that the<\/p>\n
detenu pleaded guilty before the Police Officer and the Police Officer imposed<\/p>\n
a fine on him. The above pleading should be understood as a case of detenu<\/p>\n
agreeing to the compounding and the Police Officer concerned compounded<\/p>\n
the offences and imposed a penalty, which was below Rs.25,000\/-. The point<\/p>\n
to be decided is whether such a compounding and imposition of penalty could<\/p>\n
be treated as a case of finding the detenu guilty, as contemplated under the<\/p>\n
first limb of Section 2(o). A person can be found guilty only by a competent<\/p>\n
court. The said finding will be followed by the imposition of a sentence. The SI<\/p>\n
of Police is not an authority competent to find a person guilty. In this case, the<\/p>\n
substantive law applicable is the provisions of the Mines & Minerals<\/p>\n
(Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 and the procedural law applicable is the<\/p>\n
Cr.PC, as no provisions are provided under the Mines & Minerals<\/p>\n
(Development & Regulation) Act,1957, concerning the trial of offenders. So, by<\/p>\n
virtue of Section 4(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, the procedural<\/p>\n
law applicable to the trial of offences is the Cr.PC. No provision under the<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07                  -15-<\/span><\/p>\n
Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 or the Cr.PC has<\/p>\n
been brought to our notice, which makes the SI of Police, a “competent<\/p>\n
authority” to find a person guilty of an offence. The first limb of Section 2(o) will<\/p>\n
apply, if only a person is found guilty by a competent Court or by a competent<\/p>\n
authority, at least once for an offence, dealt with under the definition of<\/p>\n
“Goonda”. Though, the SI of Police concerned, is competent to compound the<\/p>\n
offences under Section 4(1A), he is not authorised to find the detenu guilty for<\/p>\n
the said offence. So, the compounding of the offences cannot be treated as<\/p>\n
equivalent to a finding of guilt by the competent Court or authority, for the<\/p>\n
purpose of Section 2(o). In the result, the petitioner’s son, the detenu cannot<\/p>\n
be treated as a “Known-Goonda”, for the purpose of the provisions of the<\/p>\n
Goonda Ordinance (Ordinance No.30 of 2007) and therefore, his detention is<\/p>\n
void. It is declared so. The detenu shall be released forthwith.<\/p>\n
WP(Crl) No.193\/07                -16-<\/span><\/p>\n
       As it is unnecessary, we are not dealing with the other contentions<\/p>\n
raised by the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
       The Writ Petition is allowed as above.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\n                                           K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,JUDGE\n\n\n\n\n19.09.2007                                 T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE\n\nsta\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court A.M.Moideen vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 19 September, 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(Crl) No. 193 of 2007(S) 1. A.M.MOIDEEN, S\/O.MARAKKAR, … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY … Respondent 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND DISTRICT 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL PRISON, 4. THE […]<\/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-68819","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nA.M.Moideen vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 19 September, 2007 - 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\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"A.M.Moideen vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 19 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007\" \/>\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=\"2007-09-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-02-05T23:21:31+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"A.M.Moideen vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 19 September, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-09-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-02-05T23:21:31+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007\"},\"wordCount\":2424,\"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\\\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007\",\"name\":\"A.M.Moideen vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 19 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-09-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-02-05T23:21:31+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"A.M.Moideen vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 19 September, 2007\"}]},{\"@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":"A.M.Moideen vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 19 September, 2007 - 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\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"A.M.Moideen vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 19 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-09-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-02-05T23:21:31+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"A.M.Moideen vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 19 September, 2007","datePublished":"2007-09-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-02-05T23:21:31+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007"},"wordCount":2424,"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\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007","name":"A.M.Moideen vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 19 September, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-09-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-02-05T23:21:31+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-m-moideen-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-on-19-september-2007#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"A.M.Moideen vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 19 September, 2007"}]},{"@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\/68819","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=68819"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/68819\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=68819"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=68819"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=68819"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}