{"id":74659,"date":"2011-09-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-09-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011"},"modified":"2018-08-05T13:28:47","modified_gmt":"2018-08-05T07:58:47","slug":"whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011","title":{"rendered":"Whether vs State on 9 September, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Whether vs State on 9 September, 2011<\/div>\n
Author: V. M. G.B.Shah,<\/div>\n
  \n Gujarat High Court Case Information System \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\nSCA\/10294\/2011\t 20\/ 20\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 10294 of 2011\n \n\nTO\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 10299 of 2011\n \n\nWITH\n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 10361 of 2011\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 10362 of 2011 \n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 10364 of 2011\n \n\n\n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI\t\t\tSd\/-\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH\t\t\tSd\/-<\/a>\n \n\n======================================\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n1.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nNO\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n2.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nTo\n\t\t\t\tbe referred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nNO\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n3.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nNO\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n4.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nNO\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\n5.\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t \n\t\t\t\t \n\nNO\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n======================================\n \n\nSHREE\nNANI MARAD SEVA SAHAKARIMANDLAI LTD, THRO ITS CHAIRMAN - Petitioner\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT THROUGH SECRETARY & 16 - Respondents\n \n\n======================================\n \n\nAppearance\n: \nMR MIHIR\nTHAKORE, SENIOR ADVOCATE ASSISTED BY MR NK PAHWA FOR M\/S\nTHAKKAR ASSOC. for Petitioners. \nMR PK JANI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER\nASSISTED BY MR NJ SHAH, AGP for Respondent No. 1.  \nNone\nfor Respondent Nos.2, 6. \nNOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent No. 3.\n \nMR HS MUNSHAW for Respondent No. 3.  \nMR BS PATEL ASSISTED BY\nMR CHIRAG B PATEL for Respondent No. 4.  \nMR PS CHAMPANERI for\nRespondent No. 5.  \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 V. M. SAHAI\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nand\n\t\t\n\t\n\t \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n \n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate<\/a>\n: 09\/09\/2011 \nCOMMON ORAL JUDGMENT<\/pre>\n
(Per
\n: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI)<\/a><\/p>\n
1.\t\tThese
\nwrit petitions have been filed by the petitioners who are members of
\nCo-operative Societies dispensing agricultural credit in the market
\narea.  With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, all
\nthese petitions are heard together on merits and they are being
\ndisposed of by this common judgment as they pertain to the same
\nquestion of law involved in these petitions.  Special Civil
\nApplication No.10294 of 2011 shall be the leading writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
2.\t\tThe
\nDirector of Agricultural Marketing and Rural Finance, Gujarat State
\nissued a notification dated 21.06.2011 fixing the date of election of
\nAgriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, District Rajkot (for
\nshort the APMC) which is in vernacular (Gujarati) and its English
\ntranslation is extracted as under :-\n<\/p>\n
\t Notice
\ninstructing about General Election-2011 of Agriculture Produce Market
\nCommittee, Dhoraji, Taluka Dhoraji, District Rajkot.\n<\/p>\n
\tIntimation
\nis hereby given to all the concerned of the market area of
\nAgriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Taluka Dhoraji,
\nDistrict Rajkot that as per the provision made in section -11 of the
\nGujarat Agriculture Produce Market Act, 1963, as the period of the
\nexisting Committee is going to be over, the programme with regard to
\nthe general election of the said Committee has been kept as mentioned
\nbelow. In this connection, this  notice is published under Rule-
\n10(2) of the Rules of the Gujarat Agriculture Produce Market of the
\nyear 1965.\n<\/p>\n
Name of Market Area<\/p>\n
Name of Polling Station.\n<\/p>\n
Name of members to elect<\/p>\n
Date, Place and time for
\n\t\t\tgiving letters of nomination.\n<\/p>\n
Date, Place and time for
\n\t\t\tverifying letters of nomination.\n<\/p>\n
Date of withdrawal of
\n\t\t\tcandidature.\n<\/p>\n
Date of Election<\/p>\n
Date, Place and time of
\n\t\t\tvote counting.\n<\/p>\n
1<\/span><\/p>\n
2<\/span><\/p>\n
3<\/span><\/p>\n
4<\/span><\/p>\n
5<\/span><\/p>\n
6<\/span><\/p>\n
7<\/span><\/p>\n
8<\/span><\/p>\n
Agriculture
\n\t\t\tProduce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Tal. Dhoraji, Dist. Rajkot.\n<\/p>\n
(1) Farmer   <\/p>\n
Section<\/p>\n
(2) Trade
\n\t\t\tSection<\/p>\n
(3) Section
\n\t\t\tof Co-operative Marketing Societies<\/p>\n
8<\/span><\/p>\n
4<\/span><\/p>\n
1<\/span><\/p>\n
Date :\n<\/p>\n
12.09.2011 in
\n\t\t\tthe office of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Tal.
\n\t\t\tDhoraji, Dist. Rajkot.  Time : From 11.00 a.m. To 17.00 p.m.<\/p>\n
Date :\n<\/p>\n
13.09.2011 in
\n\t\t\tthe office of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Tal.
\n\t\t\tDhoraji, Dist. Rajkot.  Time : From 11.00 a.m. Till completion. .\n<\/p>\n
Date :\n<\/p>\n
16.09.2011 in
\n\t\t\tthe office of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Tal.
\n\t\t\tDhoraji, Dist. Rajkot. Time :\n<\/p>\n
From 11.00
\n\t\t\ta.m. To 15.00.\n<\/p>\n
Date :\n<\/p>\n
26.09.2011 in
\n\t\t\tthe office of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Tal.
\n\t\t\tDhoraji, Dist. Rajkot. Time :\n<\/p>\n
From 9.00
\n\t\t\ta.m. To 17.00.\n<\/p>\n
Date :\n<\/p>\n
27.09.2011 in
\n\t\t\tthe office of Agriculture Produce Market Committee, Dhoraji, Tal.
\n\t\t\tDhoraji, Dist. Rajkot.  Time : From 9.00 a.m. Till completion.\n<\/p>\n
\t\tNo.bsr\/01\/th\/1908\/2011,
\nThe Director, Agriculture Market and Rural Economy,Block No.13\/2, Dr.
\nJivraj Mehta Bhawan, Gujarat State, Gandhinagar, dtd.21\/3\/11.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tSd\/-\n<\/p>\n
illegible<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(
\nM.D.Chauhan )<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\tThe
\nDirector, Agriculture Market and Rural \t\t\t\t\tEconomy, Gujarat State,
\nGandhinagar.\n<\/p>\n
Note:\n<\/p>\n
Each candidate shall deposit Rs. 100\/- along with candidature letter
\nin the office of the District Registrar, Co-Operative Assembly,
\nRajkot, Dist. Rajkot and the receipt shall be produced along with the
\nletter of appointment.\n<\/p>\n
2.1.\t\tThe
\nDirector of Agricultural Marketing and Rural Finance, Gujarat State
\nalso issued an order on 21.06.2011 appointing Co-operation Officer
\n(Marketing) and District Registrar as Authorized Officer to conduct
\nthe elections and under Rule 7 (1) fixed 12.07.2011 for sending the
\nlist of voters by the Co-operative Societies which were dispensing
\nagricultural credit, to the Authorized Officer for preparing voter
\nlist for election of APMC.\n<\/p>\n
3.\t\tThe
\nDirector of Agricultural Marketing and Rural Finance, Gujarat State,
\nthereafter, announced the detailed programme for holding elections of
\nAPMC, Dhoraji, District Rajkot is in vernacular (Gujarati) and its
\nEnglish translation is as under :-\n<\/p>\n
Sr.\n<\/p>\n
No.\n<\/p>\n
Particulars of Programme<\/p>\n
Date<\/p>\n
01.<\/p>\n
Declaration of Election.\n<\/p>\n
05.07.2011<\/p>\n
02.<\/p>\n
To give instruction to the Authorized Officer to
\n\t\t\t\tprepare voters’ list.\n<\/p>\n
05.07.2011<\/p>\n
02 (a).\n<\/p>\n
Date of forwarding voters’ list to the
\n\t\t\t\tAuthorized (Rule – 7)<\/p>\n
12.07.2011<\/p>\n
03.<\/p>\n
Primary Publication of voters’ list within 7
\n\t\t\t\tdays from the date of calling for list.  (Rule 7 (2))<\/p>\n
12.07.2011<\/p>\n
04(a).\n<\/p>\n
Last date for submitting application for
\n\t\t\t\tobjection and addition and alteration in primary publication
\n\t\t\t\tlist, within 14 days from the date of primary (Rule 8 (1))<\/p>\n
29.07.2011<\/p>\n
04(b).\n<\/p>\n
Last date for submitting alteration \/ objection
\n\t\t\t\tagainst republished primary voters’ list. (Rule 8 (1) (a)).\n<\/p>\n
10.08.2011<\/p>\n
5.<\/p>\n
Final publication of voters’ list.\n<\/p>\n
12.09.2011<\/p>\n
6.<\/p>\n
Date of submission of nomination forms (Rule 10
\n\t\t\t\t(2)) from Morning 11 to Evening 5 O’clock.\n<\/p>\n
12.09.2011<\/p>\n
7.<\/p>\n
Primary notification of nomination forms
\n\t\t\t\t(Rule-14)<\/p>\n
12.09.2011<\/p>\n
8.<\/p>\n
Verification of nomination forms (Rule-15) from
\n\t\t\t\tMorning 11 to it is completed.\n<\/p>\n
13.09.2011<\/p>\n
9.<\/p>\n
Date of withdrawing nomination forms Rule 17 (1)
\n\t\t\t\tfrom Morning 11 to 3 O’clock.\n<\/p>\n
16.09.2011<\/p>\n
10.<\/p>\n
Final publication of list of candidates Rule 17
\n\t\t\t\t(2)<\/span><\/p>\n
16.09.2011<\/p>\n
11.<\/p>\n
Day of election from Morning 9 to 5 O’clock.\n<\/p>\n
26.09.2011<\/p>\n
12.<\/p>\n
Date of counting of vote from Morning 9 to 5
\n\t\t\t\tO’clock.\n<\/p>\n
27.09.2011<\/p>\n
13.<\/p>\n
Date of result of election (Rule-21)<\/p>\n
27.09.2011<\/p>\n
4.\t\tIn
\nthese writ petitions, the petitioners have challenged the
\norder\/public notice dated 10.08.2011 by which the objection filed
\nunder Rule 8 (1-A) by the petitioners on 05.08.2011 and 07.08.2011
\nchallenging the revised voter list published under Rule 8 (1-A) on
\n31.07.2011.  The main objection of the petitioners was that 12
\nco-operative societies have been registered by the Registrar,
\nCo-operative Societies on 02.07.2011 and on other dates upto
\n14.07.2011 and their members have been treated to be valid members
\nand their names have wrongly been included in the revised voter list
\nthough their names did not figure in the preliminary voter list which
\nwas published on 15.07.2011.\n<\/p>\n
4.1\t\tIt
\nis stated in the affidavit-in-reply that under the Gujarat
\nAgricultural Produce Market Rules, 1965 (for short Rules 1965), the
\npetitioner has right to object to the name mentioned in the
\npreliminary\/ provisional voter list.  It has also been stated that in
\nview of the Full Bench decision of this Court in Daheda
\nGroup Seva Sahakari Mandli Limited v. R.
\nD. Rohit, Authorized Officer and Co-Operative Officer (Marketing)<\/a>
\n2006-GCD-211
\nand other
\ndecisions, inclusion or exclusion of name in the voter list could not
\nbe considered under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the
\nremedy of the petitioners lies under Rule 28 of the Rules 1965 for
\nfiling election petition.\n<\/p>\n
4.2\t\tIt
\nis further stated that since all the 12 Societies have been
\nregistered prior to notification by the Director, Agricultural
\nMarketing and Rural Finance, Gujarat State for holding election of
\nthe Market Committee, the names of the Managing Committee of the
\nSocieties have rightly been included in the voter list by the
\nAuthorized Officer. It has been reemphasized that the members of the
\nrespondent No.4 Society had collected deposits which have been
\ndisbursed to the needy members of the society. Hence, it is clear
\nthat the Society is dispensing agricultural credit on the date of
\ndeclaration of the election.\n<\/p>\n
5.\t\tThe
\nother challenge by the petitioners in these writ petitions is to the
\norder dated 02.07.2011 passed by the Additional District Registrar,
\nCo-operative Societies (Panchayat) Co-operative Societies and Member,
\nDistrict Technical Committee, District Panchayat, Rajkot, respondent
\nNo.3, by which the respondent No.4 Shree Bhadajalia Seva Sahkari
\nMandali Ltd. and other Seva Sahkari Mandali Ltd., have been
\nregistered. The petitioner has also challenged the order passed by
\nthe State Government dated 31.8.1981.\n<\/p>\n
5.1\t\tThe
\nobjection to the registration of the 12 Co-operative Societies by the
\npetitioners is based on the fact that the petitioner society operates
\nin village Nani Marad and Bhadajalia of Taluka Dhoraji, District
\nRajkot. The petitioner has 320 Members, out of which, 138 members
\nhave availed the agricultural credit from the petitioner Society.
\nThe total number of agriculturists in both the aforesaid villages are
\n418, out of which 320 are members of the petitioner society. The
\nCo-operative Society of the petitioner is affiliated with Rajkot
\nDistrict Co-operative Bank Ltd. and the members of the Society could
\navail financial assistance also from the Bank. A drive has been
\ninitiated by the District Registrar, Rajkot to register the new
\nCo-operative Society to inflate voters list in respect of various
\nlocal authorities, including the APMC, Dhoraji and other Co-operative
\nSocieties, just to benefit the party in power.\n<\/p>\n
5.2\t\tA Notice dated 11.4.2011
\nwas issued by the Additional District Registrar, Rajkot, Co-operative
\nSocieties (Panchayat) to the petitioner to file objection, if any,
\nagainst the proposed registration of the respondent No.4 Society. The
\npetitioner submitted a detailed representation\/objection to the
\nnotice dated 11.4.2011 and in the objection, it was mentioned by the
\npetitioner that there was absolutely no need to have any other
\nCo-operative Societies to cover the area for operation, in which the
\npetitioner Society was operating. It was also pointed out by the
\npetitioner that about 14 members of the petitioner society were
\nincluded in the list of members of the respondent No.4 Society
\nwithout the consent of the petitioner. It was also stated that total
\nprofit of the society of the petitioner was only Rs.17,000\/-, which
\nis a very negligible amount, therefore, second Co-operative Society
\nin the area may not be registered.  Without considering the objection
\nof the petitioner, the Additional Registrar Co-operative Societies
\n(Panchayat) passed impugned order dated 2.7.2011 without assigning
\nany reason for granting registration in favour of respondent No.4
\nSociety.  Copy of the registration made on 2.7.2011 was not given to
\nthe petitioner in spite of letter dated 28.7.2011.  However, copy of
\nthe order dated 2.7.2011 was received from Dilipbhai Chavda, who is a
\nmember of the District Panchayat, Rajkot on 28.7.2011. The fact of
\nregistration of the respondent No.4 Society and other newly
\nregistered Co-operative Societies has been challenged by the
\npetitioners.\n<\/p>\n
5.3\t\tA further affidavit has
\nbeen filed by the petitioner to the effect that Nathubha Jilubha
\nJadeja is the President of the Society and is also voter in respect
\nof the Agriculturists constituency of APMC, Dhoraji.  The Director
\nhas issued an election programme by notification dated 21.6.2011.
\nRespondent No.4 Society has not opened its account with District
\nCentral Co-operative Bank till date and as per the Scheme of the
\nGujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961 (for short the Co-operative
\nAct) the aforesaid Society is required to open a Bank account with
\nthe District Central Co-operative Bank and seek financial assistance
\nso that the agricultural credit may be given to the farmers who are
\nmembers of the Society. A certificate dated 8.8.2011 to the effect
\nthat no account has been opened, issued by Shri Rajkot District
\nCo-operative Bank Ltd. has been filed along with the further
\naffidavit. On the other hand, respondent No.4 Society has opened its
\naccount at State Bank of India, Dhoraji Branch, which is clear from
\nthe certificate issued by the Bank on 8.8.2011, which is a Saving
\nAccount but no agricultural or other credit had been advanced to the
\nrespondent No.4 Society. Since no account has been opened with the
\nDistrict Central Co-operative Bank, the respondent No.4 Society could
\nnot dispense the agricultural credit to its members without there
\nbeing any financial assistance from the bank in view of the date of
\nregistration of the society and date of declaration of the election
\nprogramme.\n<\/p>\n
5.4\t\tIt is absolutely not
\npossible to dispense the agricultural credit. Under Section 49 read
\nwith the applicable bye-laws, which are model by laws, a detailed
\nprocedure has been provided for dispensation of agricultural credit.
\nThe procedure involves receiving applications from the members,
\napplying for sanction of loan to the Bank, sanction of the loan by
\nthe Bank to the Society, creation of mortgage deeds, registration
\nwith Talati-cum-Mantri of the concerned village etc. The procedure
\nunder the Co-operative Act is required to be followed, which provides
\na detailed procedure for inviting objections etc. before creation of
\nthe charge under the provisions of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code.
\nNone of these has taken place so far so far as respondent No.4
\nSociety or its members are concerned. Since no agricultural credit
\nhas been dispensed, the members of the Managing Committee of
\nrespondent No.4 Society are not entitled to be included in the list
\nof voters of agriculture constituency. It is also pointed out that
\nthe respondent No.4 Society has been registered on the eve of
\ndeclaration of the election programme with sole object of inflating
\nthe list of voters in the election of APMC, Dhoraji and inclusion of
\nnames of the members of the Managing Committee of respondent No.4
\nSociety in the list is bad and illegal. The petitioner has also
\npointed out that the Election Officer has included the members of the
\nManaging Committee of 12 Societies in the provisional list of voters
\npublished on 31.7.2011.\n<\/p>\n
5.5\t\tThe list of Societies is in
\nvernacular (Gujarati) of which English translation is as follows :-\n<\/p>\n
Sr. No<\/p>\n
Name of
\n\t\t\tSociety<\/p>\n
Whether
\n\t\t\topened account with District Central Co. Op. Bank.\n<\/p>\n
Bank with
\n\t\t\twhich account opened, if any.\n<\/p>\n
Whether any
\n\t\t\tagricultural loan disbursed by SBI \/ BOB<\/p>\n
Date of
\n\t\t\tRegistration of Co-operative Society<\/p>\n
1.<\/p>\n
Shree
\n\t\t\tPatanvav Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
SBI,
\n\t\t\tPatanvav Branch<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
31.3.2011<\/p>\n
2.<\/p>\n
Shree
\n\t\t\tPatidar Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd., <\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
SBI,
\n\t\t\tPatanvav Branch<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
31.3.2011<\/p>\n
3.<\/p>\n
Shree
\n\t\t\tChichod Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
SBI,
\n\t\t\tPatanvav Branch<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
31.3.2011<\/p>\n
4.<\/p>\n
Shree
\n\t\t\tRushiraj Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
SBI, Dhoraji
\n\t\t\tBranch<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
4.6.2011<\/p>\n
5.<\/p>\n
Shree
\n\t\t\tBhojalram Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
SBI, Dhoraji
\n\t\t\tBranch<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
4.6.2011<\/p>\n
6.<\/p>\n
Shree
\n\t\t\tKhodiyar Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
SBI, Dhoraji
\n\t\t\tBranch<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
4.6.2011<\/p>\n
7.<\/p>\n
Shree
\n\t\t\tBhutavad Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
SBI, Dhoraji
\n\t\t\tBranch<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
2.7.2011<\/p>\n
8.<\/p>\n
Shree
\n\t\t\tVadodar Kishan Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
BOB, Vadodar<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
2.7.2011<\/p>\n
9.<\/p>\n
Shree
\n\t\t\tBhadaljalia Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
SBI, Dhoraji
\n\t\t\tBranch<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
2.7.2011<\/p>\n
10.<\/p>\n
Shree Moti
\n\t\t\tParbadi Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
BOB, Moti
\n\t\t\tParbadi<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
4.7.2011<\/p>\n
11.<\/p>\n
Shree Sardar
\n\t\t\tSeva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
SBI, Dhoraji
\n\t\t\tBranch<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
4.7.2011<\/p>\n
12.<\/p>\n
Shree
\n\t\t\tUmiyaji Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd.,<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
SBI, Dhoraji
\n\t\t\tBranch<\/p>\n
No<\/p>\n
4.7.2011<\/p>\n
5.6.\t\tIt is alleged by the
\npetitioner that the members of the Managing Committee of the
\naforesaid 12 societies were registered on the eve of declaration of
\nthe election programme or after the date of publication of the
\nnotification declaring elections of APMC, Dhoraji. The fact is that
\nnone of the aforesaid 12 Societies has opened their account with the
\nDistrict Central Co-operative Bank and they have opened their
\naccounts either at State Bank of India or at Bank of Baroda. It is
\nfurther stated that the names of the voters mentioned from Serial
\nNumber 374 to 553 are the names which represents the members of the
\nManaging Committee of the aforesaid 12 societies who are not eligible
\nto be voters nor their members could participate in the election as
\ntheir societies have never disbursed any agricultural credit to their
\nmembers\/ farmers.\n<\/p>\n
6.\tIn
\nthe affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the respondent No.4,
\npreliminary objections have been raised that the petitioner has an
\nalternative remedy of filing an appeal under Section 153 of the
\nCo-operative Act against the registration of the Society of the
\nrespondent No.4 Society and other Societies, thereafter, if they are
\naggrieved, they can file revision application under Section 155 of
\nthe Co-operative Act.  The disputed questions of fact cannot be gone
\ninto under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n
6.1\t\tIt
\nhas been further stated that the order passed by the respondent on
\n2.7.2011 is a reasoned order. The Bank account in the Central
\nCo-operative Bank Limited could not be opened due to the reason that
\nVitthalbhai Randadiya, who is, now, Member of the Parliament had
\nearlier been the Chairman of the Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. and
\nwas also earlier elected as MLA from Dhoraji constituency and now,
\nafter his resignation, his son is elected as MLA from the said
\nconstituency and but the Bank under the political influence of the
\naforesaid Member of the Parliament, refused to open an account of the
\nrespondent No.4 Society, therefore, the respondent No.4 has opened
\nthe account with the State Bank of India, which has also given ‘No
\nObjection Certificate’ for registration of respondent No.4 Society.
\nThe members of the societies are being threatened that they would not
\nbe given loan by the District Bank. The Member of Parliament wants to
\ncreate a monopoly and defeat the Co-operative movement in the
\nDistrict and the petitioner belongs to the group of Vitthalbhai and
\nrespondent No.4 has filed writ petition, being Special Civil
\nApplication No.5583 of 2011 for opening a Bank account in District
\nCentral Co-operative Bank, which is pending before this Court.
\nRespondent No.4 started to dispense the agricultural credit from its
\nown fund and necessary evidence has been produced before the
\nAuthorized Officer.\n<\/p>\n
7.\t\tWe
\nhave heard Mr. Mihir Thakore, Mr. N. D. Nanavati, leanred senior
\ncounsel assisted by Mr. N. K. Pahwa, learned counsel appearing for
\nthe petitioners, Mr. P. K. Jani, learned Government Pleader assisted
\nby Mr. N. J. Shah, Assistant Government Pleader appearing for
\nrespondents, Mr. B. S. Patel, Mr. H. S. Munshaw, learned counsel
\nappearing for respondents. Learned Government Pleader Mr. P. K. Jani
\nhas produced the records.\n<\/p>\n
8.\t\tThe
\nchallenge made by the petitioners to the order dated 02.07.2011 or
\norders challenging the registration of the twelve Co-operative
\nSocieties are concerned, we are of the opinion that the Co-operative
\nAct provides a statutory alternative remedy of appeal and revision
\nunder Sections 153 and 155 of the Co-operative Act.  Therefore,
\nwithout entering into merits of the case, we relegate the petitioners
\nto pursue alternative remedy of appeal and thereafter revision.  In
\ncase, the petitioners file an appeal before the Appellate Authority,
\nit shall be decided on merits.\n<\/p>\n
9.\t\tOn
\nthe argument of learned counsel for the parties, the following
\nquestions arise for consideration in these writ petitions; what is
\nthe date when election process commenced; whether the twelve newly
\nregistered Co-operative Societies dispensed agricultural credit in
\nthe market area and their members could be treated to be valid
\nvoters; whether the objections filed by the petitioners under Rule 8
\n(1-A) was required to be decided by the Authorized Officer passing a
\nreasoned order; whether in absence of any decision on the objection
\nfiled by the petitioners, it could be argued on behalf of the
\nAuthorized Officer that the public notice dated 10.08.2011 would be
\ndeemed under Rule 8 (2) his decision and to support his contentions
\nwhether the affidavit filed by him stating that he conducted summary
\ninquiry by calling respondents only could be relied; whether passing
\nof no order by Authorized Officer could be treated to be malice in
\nlaw; whether the oral suggestion made on behalf of the Authorized
\nOfficer that if this Court permits, he would give decision by
\nreasoned order within time to be fixed by the Court, could be
\naccepted; whether the addition of new voters was a fraud on election
\nprocess; whether in view of Rule 28 of Rules 1965 which provides for
\nelection petition, these writ petitions are liable to be dismissed on
\nthe ground of alternative remedy.\n<\/p>\n
10.\t\tIt
\nis relevant to point out over here that the learned Government
\nPleader has stated that in public notice dated 10.08.2011, Shree
\nUmiyaji Seva Sahakari Mandli Limited and its members have been
\ndeleted for the voter list as this Society was registered on
\n14.07.2011 after 12.07.2011 and now the dispute is confined to eleven
\nrespondent Co-operative Societies.\n<\/p>\n
11.\t\tBefore
\nanswering the questions arising in these writ petitions, it is
\nnecessary to consider the various provisions of Rules 1965. Rule 4
\nlays down that Director shall fix the date of election of a Market
\nCommittee.  Rule 5 provides for different lists of voters.  In these
\npetitions, we are concerned with list of voters as provided in Rule 5
\n(1) which provides preparation of list of voters under Clause (i) of
\nsub-section (1) of Section 11 of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce
\nMarkets Act, 1963 (for short the APMC Act) i.e. Co-operative
\nSocieties dispensing agricultural credit in the market area.  Rule 7
\nmakes the provision for preparation of list of voters for general
\nelection for the Market Committee and we are concerned with Rule 7
\n(1) (i) which relates to preparation of list of voters for general
\nelection to the Market Committee and every Co-operative Society
\ndispensing agricultural credit in the market area had been mandated
\nto communicate the full names of the members of its Managing
\nCommittee together with the list of residence of each members to the
\nAuthorized Officer before 12.07.2011, the date fixed by the Director.
\n The Authorized Officer is under a duty to prepare the list of voters
\nas required by Rule 5 on the basis of the information received by him
\nby the Co-operative Societies dispensing agricultural credit which
\nshould contain the full name, place of residence and serial number of
\neach voter.  Rule 8 of Rules 1965 reads as under :-\n<\/p>\n
“8.\tProvisional and final publication of lists
\nof  voters :\n<\/p>\n
(1)\tAs  soon as a list of voters is prepared under rule
\n5, it shall be published  by the authorized officer by affixing a
\ncopy thereof at the office of the market committee and at some
\nconspicuous place in the principal market yard in the  market  area
\nalong with a notice stating that any person whose name is not entered
\nin the list of voters and who claims that his name should be entered
\ntherein or any person who thinks that his name or the name of some
\nother  person  has  been wrongly entered therein or has not been
\ncorrectly entered  may,  within fourteen days from the date of the
\npublication of the notice, apply to  the authorized  officer for an
\namendment of the list of voters.\n<\/p>\n
(1-A) After receiving applications if any, under
\nsub-rule (1) a revised draft list of voters shall be published by the
\nauthorized officer by affixing a copy thereof on the notice board of
\nAgricultural Produce Market Committee and at some conspicuous place
\nin the principal market yard of the market area,  along with a notice
\nstating that any person who wishes to raise any objection against any
\nnew name entered in this list may apply within  seven days from the
\ndate of publication of this notice to the authorized officer for an
\namendment in the revised draft list of voters.\n<\/p>\n
(2)  If  any  application is received under (sub-rule
\n(1-A),  the  authorized  officer shall decide the same and shall
\ncause to be prepared and published the final list of voters, after
\nmaking such amendments therein as may be necessary in pursuance of
\nthe decision given by him on the application.   The final list shall
\nbe prepared at least thirty days before the date fixed for the
\nnomination of candidates for the election.”\n<\/p>\n
11.1\t\tIf
\nthe  above provision of Rule 8 is considered, then it would be borne
\nout that as soon as voters’ list is prepared under Rule 5, the
\nauthorized officer who is appointed for conducting the general
\nelection of market  committee  has  to publish the said voters’ list
\nby affixing a copy thereof at the office of the market committee and
\nat some conspicuous place in the market yard along with the  notice
\nstating that if any person whose name is either not entered or who
\nclaims that his name is wrongly entered, should file his objection
\nthen  within  14 days from the date of publication of the notice, the
\nauthorized officer has  to  decide  the  said objections.  Sub-Rule
\n(1) of Rule 8 further  provides that after considering and deciding
\nthe objections filed under Sub-Rule 1 of Rule 8, the second list
\nwhich is known as revised draft list has to be published.   Rule 8
\n(1-A) further clarifies that after publication of the revised draft
\nlist, a notice is to be issued inviting objections against new names
\nentered in the list and the said objections must be filed within
\nseven days and thereafter, the authorized officer has to decide the
\nsaid objections under Rule 8 (2) and  he must publish final amended
\nlist of voters atleast 30 days prior to the date fixed for filing
\nnomination papers.  Thus, Rule 8  makes it clear that when the first
\npreliminary list is published, if any, person has got any objection
\neither on account of appearing of the names of the voters  wrongly or
\non account of non-appearance of  the  voters,  who  deserved to be
\nin  the voters’ list, then he must file said objections within 14
\ndays from the date of publication of the said preliminary list and
\nthen the authorized officer has to decide the said objection and only
\nafter that decision, he has to publish the revised draft list or the
\nprovisional list.  If the provision of sub-Rule (1) of Rule 8 are
\ncarefully  read, then  it  would  be  clear  that any objection for
\ninclusion or non-inclusion of voters in  the  preliminary list
\npublished under that sub-rule (1) must be taken within 14 days of the
\nsaid publication.   From the aforesaid discussion, it is apparent
\nthat after 14 days of publication of the said list, no objection
\neither for inclusion or non-inclusion could be taken and entertained
\nby the authorized officer.\n<\/p>\n
11.2\t\tSub-Rule (1-A) makes it
\nclear that when the revised voters’  list  is  published,  the only
\nobjection that could be raised is as regards persons whose names
\nhave been added in the voter list,  after deciding objections under
\nsub-rule (1) of Rule 8.  This provision is made obviously with a view
\nto see that a person whose name was not published in the preliminary
\nlist and his name comes in the revised draft list for the first time,
\nthen there must be opportunity to the person objecting to his being
\nin the voters’ list and only with this view, this provision of
\nsub-rule 1(A) was enacted.\n<\/p>\n
12.\t\tBefore we consider the
\nquestions raised by learned counsel for the parties on merits, it is
\nnecessary to deal with the preliminary objection raised by learned
\ncounsel for the respondents that the writ petitions are liable to be
\ndismissed on the ground of alternative remedy of election petition.
\nRule 28 of the Rules 1965 provides that election of a candidate who
\nhas been elected could be challenged by filing election petition.
\nLearned counsel for the respondents has placed reliance on the Full
\nBench decision of this Court in Daheda
\nGroup Seva Sahakari Mandli Limited v. R. D. Rohit, Authorized Officer
\nand Co-Operative Officer (Marketing)<\/a> 2006-GCD-211
\nwherein in paragraph 33 reference had been answered as under :-\n<\/p>\n
“33.\tIn
\nview of the above discussion, we answer the Reference as under :-\n<\/p>\n
i. \tA  person  whose  name  is  not  included  in the voters’ list can avail benefit of  provisions  of Rule 28 of the Rules by filing Election Petition.\n<\/p>\n
ii.\tAs the authority under Rule 28 has wide power to cancel, confirm and  amend  the election and to direct to hold fresh election in case the election is set aside, remedy under Rule 28 is an efficacious remedy.\n<\/p>\n
Iii.\tEven  though  a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution  of India  is  maintainable  though alternative  remedy  is available, the powers are to be  exercised  in  case  of  extraordinary  or special circumstances such as where the order is ultra vires or nullity and\/or  ex facie  without jurisdiction.   The  exclusion  or  inclusion  of names in the voters’ list  cannot  be  termed  as extraordinary circumstances warranting interference by this Court under Article  226  of the Constitution of India and such questions are to be decided in an Election Petition under  Rule 28 of the Rules.”\n<\/p>\n
12.1\t\tIn view of the aforesaid decision of the Full Bench, it is clear that a person whose name is not included in the voter list and the exclusion or inclusion of names in the voter list cannot be termed as extra ordinary circumstance warranting any interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and such questions could be decided in an election petition under Rule 28 of the Rules as the Authority under Rule 28 had been conferred with wide powers.  In view of the aforesaid decision of the Full Bench, these petitions are liable to be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy.  Since we are dismissing these writ petitions on the ground of alternative remedy, it is not necessary for us to consider the other arguments raised by learned counsel for the parties.\n<\/p>\n
13.\t\tIn the result, these writ petitions are dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy of election petition available to the petitioners under Rule 28 of the the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Market Rules, 1965.  So far as relief claimed by the petitioners with regard to registration of the respondents Co-operative Societies are concerned, it is open to the petitioners to challenge the order dated 02.07.2011 or other such orders by way of Appeal and thereafter by Revision under Sections 153 and 155 respectively of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961.  Parties shall bear their own costs.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tSd\/-\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[V. M. SAHAI, J.]<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tSd\/-\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[G. B. SHAH, J.]<\/p>\n
Savariya<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Whether vs State on 9 September, 2011 Author: V. M. G.B.Shah, Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/10294\/2011 20\/ 20 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10294 of 2011 TO SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10299 of 2011 WITH SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10361 of […]<\/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-74659","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nWhether vs State on 9 September, 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\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Whether vs State on 9 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-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=\"2011-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-05T07:58:47+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=\"24 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Whether vs State on 9 September, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-05T07:58:47+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011\"},\"wordCount\":4556,\"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\\\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011\",\"name\":\"Whether vs State on 9 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-05T07:58:47+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Whether vs State on 9 September, 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":"Whether vs State on 9 September, 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\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Whether vs State on 9 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-05T07:58:47+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":"24 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Whether vs State on 9 September, 2011","datePublished":"2011-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-05T07:58:47+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011"},"wordCount":4556,"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\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011","name":"Whether vs State on 9 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-05T07:58:47+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/whether-vs-state-on-9-september-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Whether vs State on 9 September, 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\/74659","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=74659"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/74659\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=74659"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=74659"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=74659"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}