{"id":75895,"date":"2010-03-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-03-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010"},"modified":"2018-11-30T02:01:25","modified_gmt":"2018-11-29T20:31:25","slug":"state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010","title":{"rendered":"State vs Dulabhram on 10 March, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">State vs Dulabhram on 10 March, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S.R.Brahmbhatt,&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\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nCR.A\/680\/2004\t 6\/ 6\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\nAPPEAL No. 680 of 2004\n \n\n \n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT\n \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\n\t\t\tbe referred 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 \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT &amp; 1 - Appellants\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nDULABHRAM\nSUNDARDAR AGRAVAL - Respondent \n\n \n\n=========================================================\nAppearance : \nMR\nMG NANAVATY ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR\nfor Appellants : 1 - 2. \nMS\nROOPAL R PATEL for Respondent :\n1, \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 S.R.BRAHMBHATT\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n \n \n\n\n \n\nDate\n: 10\/03\/2010 \n\n \n\n \n \nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n<p>Heard<br \/>\n\tlearned advocate for the parties.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tappellant &#8211; State of Gujarat has preferred this Appeal under<br \/>\n\tSection 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the order<br \/>\n\tof acquittal dated 22.1.2004 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate<br \/>\n\tFirst Class, Morbi in Criminal Case No. 530 of 1996, whereunder, the<br \/>\n\taccused respondent is acquitted of the charge of committing offence<br \/>\n\tpunishable under Section 27(b) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940<br \/>\n\t(hereinafter referred to as &#8216;the Drug Act&#8217; for brevity).\n<\/p>\n<p>It<br \/>\n\twas the case of the prosecution before the Court that on 18.1.1996,<br \/>\n\tthe Drug Inspector along with panch witnesses visited the dispensary<br \/>\n\tof the accused, who holds decree of B.S.A.M and is practicing in<br \/>\n\tAyurvedic medicine. The accused was found in possession of the<br \/>\n\tallopathy drug called (i) Metrodex-S expectorant (50ml) produced by<br \/>\n\tMetro Golden Laboratory, Bombay, (ii) Clofen Plus Tab, produced by<br \/>\n\tInconotive Farma Industries, Deesa, (iii) Gama Benzon Hexachloride<br \/>\n\tLotion, USP-19 produced by Rajat Pharmaceutical Industries, Bombay,<br \/>\n\tcontrary to the provisions of Section 18(c) of the Drug Act. As he<br \/>\n\tdid not have licence to keep those drugs nor was he be competent,<br \/>\n\tbeing a medical practitioner, under Section 2(ee) of the Registered<br \/>\n\tMedical Practitioner Act and  there was no licence obtained for<br \/>\n\tholding such drugs, as required under Section 18(c) of the Drug Act,<br \/>\n\tThus, he has committed an offence punishable under Section 27(b) of<br \/>\n\tthe Drug Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\taccused in his further statement under Section 313 of the Code of<br \/>\n\tCriminal Procedure, gave an explanation that one Shivlal Prabhulal<br \/>\n\tof his village had came to show him those drugs as to whether they<br \/>\n\twere proper drugs for his ailment and had forgotten them there. The<br \/>\n\tsaid person Shivlal Prabhulal also had been examined as defence<br \/>\n\twitness at Exh. 50, who testified to the said effect. The defense<br \/>\n\tcontended that the intention and action of stocking drug for a sell<br \/>\n\tis an essential ingredient and that being absent, the conviction<br \/>\n\tcannot be recorded. The Court accepted the defence and acquitted the<br \/>\n\taccused vide order dated 22.1.2004, which is impugned in present<br \/>\n\tAppeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.\n<\/p>\n<p>Shri<br \/>\n\tNanavaty, learned APP appearing for the appellant State has<br \/>\n\tcontended that there cannot be any dispute with regard to<br \/>\n\tproposition of law for convicting a person for offence punishable<br \/>\n\tunder Section 27(b) of the Drug Act. Mere stocking of the drug is<br \/>\n\tnot sufficient but prosecution has to establish the stocking of the<br \/>\n\tdrug with an intention to sell, which could be inferred by way of<br \/>\n\texhibiting the same or stocking it in large scale. But reasoning of<br \/>\n\tthe trail Court in respect that accused &#8211; respondent being Ayurvedic<br \/>\n\tpractitioner,  he can stock allopathy medicine, cannot be a reason<br \/>\n\tsustainable in eye of law for acquittal.\n<\/p>\n<p>Ms.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tRoopal Patel, learned advocate appearing for the respondent accused<br \/>\n\thas contended that the respondent has right to support the order of<br \/>\n\tacquittal on any other one ground, which is validly available in<br \/>\n\tsupport of acquittal. The factum with regard to lack of essential<br \/>\n\tingredient for bringing home the conviction namely intention to sell<br \/>\n\tor establishing the stock intended to be sold being not available,<br \/>\n\tthe order of acquittal may not be interfered with. Relying upon the<br \/>\n\tdecision of the Apex Court in case of  Mohd. Shabbir Vs.<br \/>\n\tState of Maharashtra, reported in AIR 1979 SC 564, she<br \/>\n\tsubmitted that the acquittal order may not be interfered with under<br \/>\n\tSection 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.\n<\/p>\n<p>This<br \/>\n\tCourt is in complete agreement with the submissions canvassed by<br \/>\n\tlearned advocate for the respondent. Section 18(c) of the Drug Act<br \/>\n\treads as under :-\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Section<br \/>\n\t\t\t18(c) :[manufacture for sale or for distribution, or sell, or<br \/>\n\t\t\tstock or exhibit or offer for sale,] or distribute any drug [or<br \/>\n\t\t\tcosmetic], except under, and in accordance with the conditions of,<br \/>\n\t\t\ta licence issued for such purpose under this Chapter;&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>Now<br \/>\n\tplain reading of this Section clearly shows that mere stocking in<br \/>\n\titself without any licence would not be sufficient for bringing home<br \/>\n\tguilt punishable under Section 27(b) of the Drug Act and keeping the<br \/>\n\tApex Court decision in mind, this Court is of the view that the<br \/>\n\tprosecution cannot be said to have established essential ingredient<br \/>\n\tof requiring for bringing home guilt on the part of accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>It<br \/>\n\tis required to be noted that entire case of the prosecution was in<br \/>\n\trespect of stocking aforesaid three drugs without license under<br \/>\n\tSection 18(c) and person holding B.S.A.M. decree being not exempted<br \/>\n\tunder Section 2 (ee) of the Registered Medical Practitioner act,<br \/>\n\twould not be required to be examined as the entire case could be<br \/>\n\tdecided on interpretation of Section 18(c) and requirement of<br \/>\n\tingredients for stocking of medicine, therefore this Court does not<br \/>\n\tdwell much upon the reasoning given by learned Judge on other<br \/>\n\tissues. The contention raised by Shri Nanavati with regard to<br \/>\n\taccused respondent being Ayurvedic Practitioner was not entitled to<br \/>\n\texemption under the relevant clause is not to be decided at this<br \/>\n\tstage in this appeal in view of the fact that though there is a one<br \/>\n\tjudgment of Punjab &amp; Hariyana High Court in case of  Swaran<br \/>\n\tSingh Vs. State of Punjab<br \/>\n\treported in AIR 1987 P&amp;H 81. So far as the State of<br \/>\n\tGujarat is concerned, it is required to be noted that there are<br \/>\n\tmatters pending on this issue and therefore, without detail<br \/>\n\texamination, it would not be proper for this Court to deal with this<br \/>\n\tsubmission as this stage as it is stated hereinabove, acquittal<br \/>\n\totherwise is also sustainable on the ground of stock not being<br \/>\n\tproved to be kept for sell, is sufficient ground for sustaining the<br \/>\n\tacquittal. Therefore, the acquittal is sustained. Sustaining of<br \/>\n\tacquittal may not be proved as approving the entire reasoning of the<br \/>\n\tCourt for recording acquittal. At the same time, as it is stated<br \/>\n\thereinabove, this Court has not opined about the contention with<br \/>\n\tregard to Ayurvedic Practitioner entitle to exemption in view of the<br \/>\n\tfact that acquittal was otherwise sustainable on the facts and<br \/>\n\tcircumstances mentioned hereinabove. The Criminal Appeal, therefore<br \/>\n\tfails and is accordingly, dismissed. Bail<br \/>\n\tbond stands cancelled.\n<\/p>\n<p>(S.R.BRAHMBHATT,<br \/>\nJ.)<\/p>\n<p>pallav<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court State vs Dulabhram on 10 March, 2010 Author: S.R.Brahmbhatt,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print CR.A\/680\/2004 6\/ 6 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 680 of 2004 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to [&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-75895","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 v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>State vs Dulabhram on 10 March, 2010 - 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\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State vs Dulabhram on 10 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-03-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-11-29T20:31:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State vs Dulabhram on 10 March, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-29T20:31:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1037,\"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-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010\",\"name\":\"State vs Dulabhram on 10 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-29T20:31:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State vs Dulabhram on 10 March, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"State vs Dulabhram on 10 March, 2010 - 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\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State vs Dulabhram on 10 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-03-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-11-29T20:31:25+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State vs Dulabhram on 10 March, 2010","datePublished":"2010-03-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-29T20:31:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010"},"wordCount":1037,"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-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010","name":"State vs Dulabhram on 10 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-03-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-29T20:31:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-vs-dulabhram-on-10-march-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State vs Dulabhram on 10 March, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75895","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=75895"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/75895\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=75895"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=75895"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=75895"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}