{"id":69921,"date":"2011-05-06T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-05-05T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011"},"modified":"2015-08-31T13:59:39","modified_gmt":"2015-08-31T08:29:39","slug":"vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011","title":{"rendered":"Vikram vs State on 6 May, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Vikram vs State on 6 May, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: A.L.Dave,&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\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.RA\/1189\/1991\t 5\/ 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\nREVISION APPLICATION No. 1189 of 1991\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE\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\nVIKRAM\nPABJI CHAVDA - Applicant\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT &amp; 1 - Respondents\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nASHIM PANDYA for MR VIJAY H PATEL for\nApplicant. \nMR KC SHAH, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent : 1 -\nState \nNOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) :\n2, \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 A.L.DAVE\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 01\/12\/2008 \n\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>1.\tThis<br \/>\nCriminal Revision Application is preferred by the revisionist to<br \/>\nchallenge the judgment and order rendered by the City Sessions Court,<br \/>\nin Criminal Appeal No.20\/1991, on 4.10.1991, and to challenge the<br \/>\njudgment and order passed by the Metropolitan Court No.3, in Criminal<br \/>\nCase No.3369\/1989, on 27.3.1991, convicting and confirming the<br \/>\nconviction of the revisionist for the offences punishable under<br \/>\nSections 279 &amp; 304-A of the Indian Penal Code. The trial Court,<br \/>\nafter considering the evidence, found that the prosecution was<br \/>\nsuccessful in establishing the charge and while convicting the<br \/>\nrevisionist for the offence punishable under Section 279 IPC,<br \/>\nsentenced him to undergo S.I for one month and to pay a fine of<br \/>\nRs.100\/-, in default, to undergo further S.I for one week. While<br \/>\nconvicting the revisionist for the offence punishable under Section<br \/>\n304A IPC, the Court sentenced him to undergo S.I for six months and<br \/>\nto pay a fine of Rs.200\/-, in default, to undergo further S.I for 15<br \/>\ndays.\n<\/p>\n<p>1.1\t\tThe<br \/>\nsaid judgment and order of the Metropolitan Court was challenged by<br \/>\nthe accused-revisionist before the City Sessions Court by preferring<br \/>\nCriminal Appeal No.20\/1991 and the Sessions Court by the judgment<br \/>\nimpugned, dismissed the appeal confirming the conviction and<br \/>\nsentence. Hence, this revision application before this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.\tThe<br \/>\nfacts of the case, briefly stated, are that the revisionist was<br \/>\ndriving Jeep-Car No. GUF-478 travelling from Dehgam side to Naroda<br \/>\nside on 29.10.1989 around 19.45 hours. It was the case of the<br \/>\nprosecution that the vehicle was being driven by the accused on the<br \/>\nwrong side in a rash and negligent manner, and when the Jeep-Car was<br \/>\npassing by the Naroda S.T. Bus Stand, it dashed against Cyclist<br \/>\nDeepak and as a result of the accident, Deepak suffered several<br \/>\ninjuries and ultimately, succumbed to the same. The Jeep-Car also<br \/>\ndashed against the first informant and caused injuries to his right<br \/>\nleg. An FIR was, therefore, lodged and offence was registered under<br \/>\nSections 279, 304A &amp; 337 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections<br \/>\n112 &amp; 116 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The witnesses were examined<br \/>\nand ultimately, conviction came to be recorded.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.1\t\tA<br \/>\ndispute was raised regarding identity of the driver of the vehicle,<br \/>\nbut, was turned down by both the Courts below on merits. It has also<br \/>\nbeen recorded that the identity aspect of the accused did not remain<br \/>\na matter of challenge any more, when the accused, while giving an<br \/>\napplication for exemption, specifically stated that identity of the<br \/>\naccused is not in dispute.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.\tThis<br \/>\nCourt has heard learned advocate Mr.Asim Pandya for the revisionist,<br \/>\nand learned A.P.P. Mr.K.C.Shah for the respondent-State.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.\tLearned<br \/>\nadvocate Mr.Asim Pandya submitted that accidents occur many a time in<br \/>\nabsence of any rashness or negligence on the part of driver of the<br \/>\nvehicle. He submitted further that almost 19 years have gone by since<br \/>\nthe accident and 17 years since the conviction and, therefore, if the<br \/>\nCourt is not convinced about the merits, the sentence of imprisonment<br \/>\nmay be altered by enhancing fine and reducing the sentence of<br \/>\nimprisonment.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.\tThe<br \/>\nrevision is opposed by learned A.P.P. Mr.Shah. He submitted that it<br \/>\nis true that a long time has passed since the occurrence and the<br \/>\njudgment, but, the fact remains that a young boy has lost his life in<br \/>\nthe accident. He further submitted that this is a revision<br \/>\napplication and the scope of revision is very limited. He also<br \/>\nsubmitted that so far as altering the sentence is concerned, the<br \/>\nscope is still further limited and unless judicial discretion is<br \/>\nshown to have been used in a manner, which would shock the conscious<br \/>\nof the Court, Court may not interfere with the discretion used by the<br \/>\ntrial Court. He submitted that there are two concurrent findings of<br \/>\nthe competent criminal Courts before this Court. Mr.Shah lastly<br \/>\nsubmitted that in a case, where a young boy has died in an accident,<br \/>\nsix months&#8217; S.I  cannot be considered to be too harsh, so as to brand<br \/>\nthe discretion as improper, arbitrary or perverse. The Court may,<br \/>\ntherefore, not interfere with, in exercise of its revisional<br \/>\njurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.\tThis<br \/>\nCourt has considered the rival side contentions in light of the<br \/>\nevidence on record and the legal proposition.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.\tBesides<br \/>\nthe fact that there are concurrent findings of two competent criminal<br \/>\nCourts below, the learned advocate for the revisionist also could not<br \/>\nassail the judgments and orders on merits. The involvement of the<br \/>\nrevisionist in the accident has virtually been admitted. The accident<br \/>\nand negligence part are also proved. The scope of revision<br \/>\napplication, considering as it is, would therefore, deter this Court<br \/>\nfrom entering into the merits of the conviction.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.\tSo<br \/>\nfar as the sentence part is concerned, what has been argued is that<br \/>\nlong time has elapsed since the occurrence and the conviction. It is<br \/>\nalso contended that the revisionist is financially weak and his<br \/>\nfamily may suffer, if he has to go in jail after such a long time<br \/>\nand, therefore, the sentence may be altered.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.\tIn<br \/>\nthe opinion of this Court, financial condition may be a relevant<br \/>\nfactor at the time of imposition of sentence and\/or fine. But, when<br \/>\nthis Court is called upon to exercise its revisional jurisdiction,<br \/>\nrelevant factor would be, whether the sentence imposed by the Court<br \/>\nbelow is in improper or arbitrary or perverse exercise of judicial<br \/>\ndiscretion, and if the answer is not in affirmative, the Court would<br \/>\nrefrain from exercising its revisional jurisdiction to interfere with<br \/>\nthe sentence imposed by the Court below using its judicial<br \/>\ndiscretion. In the instant case, in the accident in question, a young<br \/>\nboy has lost his life and for that purpose, the revisionist came to<br \/>\nbe convicted and sentenced to S.I for six months, which, by no<br \/>\nstretch of leniency or sympathy, can be said to be unduly harsh or<br \/>\ndisproportionate to the criminal act on the part of the revisionist.<br \/>\nThe discretion cannot be said to have been exercised in an improper,<br \/>\narbitrary or perverse manner. In this set of circumstances, this<br \/>\nCourt is of the view that revisional powers cannot be invoked in<br \/>\nfavour of the revisionist. The revision application must fail.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.\tThis<br \/>\nRevision Application stands dismissed. The judgment and order dated<br \/>\n4.10.1991 passed by the City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad, in Criminal<br \/>\nAppeal No.20\/1991 and the judgment and order dated 27.3.1991 passed<br \/>\nby the Metropolitan Court No.3, in Criminal Case No. 3369\/1989 are<br \/>\nhereby confirmed.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.\tAt<br \/>\nthis stage, learned advocate Mr.Pandya  requests for time of two<br \/>\nweeks for the revisionist to surrender to the custody. In the opinion<br \/>\nof this Court, the request is reasonable and merits acceptance. The<br \/>\nrequest is, therefore, accepted. The revisionist shall surrender<br \/>\nbefore the Lower Court within a period of two weeks from today,<br \/>\nfailing which, it would be open for the Lower Court to take<br \/>\nappropriate action for storing him to prison.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[A.L.Dave,J.]<\/p>\n<p>(patel)<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Vikram vs State on 6 May, 2011 Author: A.L.Dave,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.RA\/1189\/1991 5\/ 8 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION No. 1189 of 1991 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed [&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-69921","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 v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Vikram vs State on 6 May, 2011 - 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\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vikram vs State on 6 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-05-05T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-08-31T08:29:39+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\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Vikram vs State on 6 May, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-31T08:29:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1167,\"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\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011\",\"name\":\"Vikram vs State on 6 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-05T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-31T08:29:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vikram vs State on 6 May, 2011\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Vikram vs State on 6 May, 2011 - 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\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vikram vs State on 6 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-05-05T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-08-31T08:29:39+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\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Vikram vs State on 6 May, 2011","datePublished":"2011-05-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-31T08:29:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011"},"wordCount":1167,"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\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011","name":"Vikram vs State on 6 May, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-05-05T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-31T08:29:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikram-vs-state-on-6-may-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vikram vs State on 6 May, 2011"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/69921","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=69921"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/69921\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=69921"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=69921"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=69921"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}