{"id":71769,"date":"2011-03-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-03-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011"},"modified":"2019-04-09T09:34:41","modified_gmt":"2019-04-09T04:04:41","slug":"state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011","title":{"rendered":"State vs Gulabray on 3 March, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
State vs Gulabray on 3 March, 2011<\/div>\n
Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   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\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/2234\/2010\t 8\/ 8\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nCRIMINAL\nAPPEAL No. 2234 of 2010\n \n\n \n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT - Appellant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nGULABRAY\nRIJUMAL BHARVANI, OWNER OF JAY ANKE COLDDRINKS & 1 - Opponent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR.\nH.L. JANI, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR\nfor\nAppellant(s) : 1, \nNone for Opponent(s) : 1 -\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 Z.K.SAIYED\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 03\/03\/2011 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n
The
\n\tappellant-State has preferred the present appeal under Section 378
\n\t(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the Judgment and
\n\tOrder of acquittal dated 31.7.2010 passed by the learned Chief
\n\tJudicial Magistrate,Dahod, in Criminal Case No.2282 of 2005 for the
\n\toffences punishable under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food
\n\tAdulteration Act, 1954, whereby the learned Magistrate has acquitted
\n\tthe respondents-original accused of the charges levelled against
\n\tthem by giving benefit of doubt.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tshort facts of the prosecution case is that on 7.6.2005 the
\n\tcomplainant-Food Inspector along with his helper  had visited the
\n\tshop of the respondent no.1-original accused. At that time
\n\trespondent no.2 was present who is son of respondent no.1.  It is
\n\tthe case of the complainant that at that time the complainant
\n\tintercepted the respondent No.2 and called panch witness. It is the
\n\tcase of the complainant that after giving his identity as Food
\n\tInspector, the complainant purchased 6 x 300 m.l.  of cold drink
\n\ti.e. orange in presence of panch witness as sample and also paid
\n\tconsideration for the same. It is also the case of the complainant
\n\tthat after following due procedure of sealing, the sample was sent
\n\tfor analysis. On examination, the Public Analyst found that the said
\n\tsample was adulterated. Therefore, after following the due
\n\tprocedure, complaint was filed against the respondents-accused in
\n\tthe Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dahod for the
\n\toffences punishable under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food
\n\tAdulteration Act, 1954.\n<\/p>\n
Thereafter,
\n\tupon service of summons, the respondents-accused appeared before the
\n\tCourt and as the accused not pleaded guilty, the trial commenced.
\n\tThereafter the trial was conducted before the learned Magistrate. To
\n\tprove the case of the prosecution, prosecution has produced oral as
\n\twell as documentary evidence. Thereafter, further statement of
\n\trespondents-accused was recorded wherein the accused submitted that
\n\tas he was not vacating the house, false complaint is filed against
\n\thim by the owner.\n<\/p>\n
Thereafter,
\n\tafter considering the oral as well as documentary evidence, the
\n\tlearned Magistrate has acquitted the respondents-original accused
\n\tfrom the charges alleged against him by his Judgment and Order of
\n\tacquittal dated 31.7.2010.\n<\/p>\n
Being
\n\taggrieved and dissatisfied with the said Judgment and Order of
\n\tacquittal dated 31.7.2010 passed by the learned Chief Judicial
\n\tMagistrate, Dahod, in Criminal Case No.2282 of 2005, the
\n\tcomplainant-Food Inspector has preferred the above mentioned
\n\tCriminal Appeal.\n<\/p>\n
Heard
\n\tlearned counsel for the parties.\n<\/p>\n
Mr.\n<\/p>\n
\tJani, learned counsel for the appellant, has contended that the
\n\tJudgment and Order of acquittal passed by the learned Magistrate is
\n\tnot proper, legal and it is erroneous. He has also argued that the
\n\tlearned Magistrate has not considered the evidence of the witnesses.
\n\tHe has argued that the learned Magistrate has not considered the
\n\tfact that the Food Inspector has followed the proper procedure while
\n\tcollecting the sample, etc. are just and proper. The sample was
\n\tseized and sealed properly. Yet, the learned Magistrate has not
\n\tconsidered the evidence of prosecution. He, therefore, contended
\n\tthat the order of acquittal passed by the learned Magistrate is
\n\twithout appreciating the facts and evidence on record and is
\n\trequired to be quashed and set aside by this Hon’ble Court.\n<\/p>\n
It
\n\tis a settled legal position that in acquittal appeal, the Appellate
\n\tCourt is not required to re-write the judgment or to give fresh
\n\treasonings when the Appellate Court is in agreement with the reasons
\n\tassigned by the trial Court acquitting the accused. In the instant
\n\tcase, this Court is in full agreement with the reasons given and
\n\tfindings recorded by the trial Court while acquitting the
\n\trespondents-accused and adopting the said reasons and for the
\n\treasons aforesaid, in my view, the impugned judgment is just, legal
\n\tand proper and requires no interference by this Court. Hence, this
\n\tappeal requires to be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
Even
\n\tin a recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of State
\n\tof Goa Vs. Sanjay Thakran & Anr. Reported in (2007)3 SCC 75,
\n\tthe Court has reiterated the powers of the High Court in such cases.\n<\/p>\n
Similar
\n\tprinciple has been laid down by the Apex Court in the cases of State
\n\tof Uttar Pradesh Vs. Ram Veer Singh & Ors, reported in 2007
\n\tAIR SCW 5553
\n\tand in Girja
\n\tPrasad (Dead) by LRs Vs. state of MP, reported in 2007 AIR SCW
\n\t5589.\n<\/p>\n
\tThus, the powers which this Court may exercise against an order of
\n\tacquittal are well settled.\n<\/p>\n
It
\n\tis also a settled legal position that in acquittal appeal, the
\n\tappellate court is not required to re-write the judgment or to give
\n\tfresh reasoning, when the reasons assigned by the Court below are
\n\tfound to be just and proper. Such principle is laid down by the Apex
\n\tCourt in the case of State
\n\tof Karnataka Vs. Hemareddy, reported in AIR 1981 SC 1417.\n<\/p>\n
Thus,
\n\tin case the Appellate Court agrees with the reasons and the opinion
\n\tgiven by the lower court, then the discussion of evidence is not
\n\tnecessary.\n<\/p>\n
I
\n\thave gone through
\n\tthe order of acquittal passed by the learned Magistrate. I have also
\n\tperused the oral as well as documentary evidence led before the
\n\ttrial Court and also considered the submissions made by learned
\n\tadvocates for the parties.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\ttrial Court has, after appreciating the oral as well as documentary
\n\tevidence, observed that  the analysis was carried out by the expert
\n\tafter few months.  The Trial Court has also observed that the test
\n\twhich was obtained  by the experts was Microscopy test which is not
\n\tpermissible in the eye of law. There is no sufficient evidence to
\n\tshow that the analysis was carried out on the same day. The leaned
\n\ttrial Judge has also observed that the Sanctioning Authority has
\n\twithout looking into the papers properly, given sanction to file
\n\tcomplaint.  The trial Court has observed that there are serious
\n\tlacuna in the oral as well as documentary evidence of prosecution.
\n\tNothing is produced on record of this appeal to rebut the concrete
\n\tfindings of the trial Court. Prosecution has failed to prove the
\n\tcase beyond reasonable doubt against the respondents-original
\n\taccused.\n<\/p>\n
Thus,
\n\tthe appellant could not bring home the charges against the
\n\trespondents-original accused in the present appeal. The prosecution
\n\thas miserably failed to prove the case against the
\n\trespondents-original accused beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, from the
\n\tevidence itself it is established that the prosecution has not
\n\tproved its case beyond reasonable doubt.\n<\/p>\n
Mr.\n<\/p>\n
\tJani, learned counsel for the appellant, is not in a position to
\n\tshow any evidence to take a contrary view in the matter or that the
\n\tapproach of the trial Court is vitiated by some manifest illegality
\n\tor that the decision is perverse or that the trial Court has ignored
\n\tthe material evidence on record.\n<\/p>\n
In
\n\tabove view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that the
\n\ttrial Court was completely justified in acquitting the
\n\trespondents-original accused of the charges levelled against him by
\n\tgiving benefit of doubt.\n<\/p>\n
I
\n\tfind that the findings recorded by the trial Court are absolutely
\n\tjust and proper and in recording the said findings, no illegality or
\n\tinfirmity has been committed by it.\n<\/p>\n
I
\n\tam, therefore, in complete agreement with the findings, ultimate
\n\tconclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the
\n\ttrial Court and hence find no reasons to interfere with the same.
\n\tHence the appeal is hereby dismissed. The
\n\tJudgment and Order of acquittal dated 31.7.2010 passed by the
\n\tlearned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dahod in Criminal Case No.2282 of
\n\t2005 is hereby confirmed. Bail bond, if any, shall stands
\n\tdischarged. Record and Proceedings, if any, be sent back to the
\n\ttrial Court concerned, forthwith.\n<\/p>\n
(Z.\n<\/p>\n
K. Saiyed, J)<\/p>\n
Vahid<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court State vs Gulabray on 3 March, 2011 Author: Z.K.Saiyed,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/2234\/2010 8\/ 8 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2234 of 2010 ========================================================= STATE OF GUJARAT – Appellant(s) Versus GULABRAY RIJUMAL BHARVANI, OWNER OF JAY ANKE COLDDRINKS & 1 – […]<\/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-71769","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nState vs Gulabray on 3 March, 2011 - 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\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State vs Gulabray on 3 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-04-09T04:04:41+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\\\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State vs Gulabray on 3 March, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-09T04:04:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1268,\"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\\\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011\",\"name\":\"State vs Gulabray on 3 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-03-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-09T04:04:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State vs Gulabray on 3 March, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"State vs Gulabray on 3 March, 2011 - 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\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State vs Gulabray on 3 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-04-09T04:04:41+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\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State vs Gulabray on 3 March, 2011","datePublished":"2011-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-09T04:04:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011"},"wordCount":1268,"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\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011","name":"State vs Gulabray on 3 March, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-03-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-09T04:04:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-gulabray-on-3-march-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State vs Gulabray on 3 March, 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:\/\/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\/71769","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=71769"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/71769\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=71769"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=71769"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=71769"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}