{"id":7756,"date":"2008-12-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-12-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008"},"modified":"2017-05-31T02:40:41","modified_gmt":"2017-05-30T21:10:41","slug":"prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008","title":{"rendered":"Prabhu vs State Of M.P on 3 December, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Prabhu vs State Of M.P on 3 December, 2008<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: . A Pasayat<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Arijit Pasayat, Mukundakam Sharma<\/div>\n<pre>                                                               REPORTABLE\n\n                 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA\n\n               CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION\n\n               CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1956 OF 2008\n              (Arising out of S.L.P (Crl.) No. 1418 OF 2008\n\n\nPrabhu                                                   ...Appellant\n\n                                  Versus\n\nState of Madhya Pradesh                                        ....\nRespondent\n\n\n\n                             JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>1.    Leave granted.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>2.    Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the<\/p>\n<p>Madhya Pradesh High Court, Jabalpur Bench, holding the appellant guilty<\/p>\n<p>of offence punishable under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian<\/p>\n<p>Penal Code, 1860 (in short the `IPC&#8217;). The appellant was sentenced to<\/p>\n<p>undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years. By the impugned judgment<br \/>\nthree appeals were disposed of being Criminal Appeal No.185 of 1995, 184<\/p>\n<p>of 1995 and 261 of 1993. The appeal filed by accused Nanhe Lal was<\/p>\n<p>dismissed while the appeal filed by the appellant was partly allowed altering<\/p>\n<p>his conviction for offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section<\/p>\n<p>34 IPC to one under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC. Similar was the<\/p>\n<p>position in respect of co-accused Jagdish.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>3.    Prosecution version in a nutshell is as follows:<\/p>\n<p>      A few months before the incident dated 28.12.1987, Dropadibai,<\/p>\n<p>daughter of Gayaprasad was molested by accused Prabhu about which he<\/p>\n<p>was facing prosecution in the court. Accused Prabhu Dayal was in this<\/p>\n<p>context trying to pressurize deceased Shankar, brother of Dropdibai, to<\/p>\n<p>amicably settle the matter, but finding that he did not budge, the accused<\/p>\n<p>persons who were related started bearing a grudge against Shankar. On<\/p>\n<p>28.12.1987 at about 9.00 in the morning, Shankar had gone out in the<\/p>\n<p>village. At 11 O&#8217; clock Gayaprasad (PW-5) had gone to call his ploughman<\/p>\n<p>followed by Rishiraj (PW-9).       No sooner that they reached Soryana<\/p>\n<p>Mohalla, they heard the call of Shanker that he be saved. Both Gayaprasad<\/p>\n<p>and Rishi Raj rushed to the place and they noticed that the three accused<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                         2<\/span><br \/>\nwere beating Gayaprasad. Accused Nanhelal was armed with Katarna (a<\/p>\n<p>sharp instrument for cutting) while the other two were armed with lathis. It<\/p>\n<p>is alleged that all of them administered several blows with their respective<\/p>\n<p>weapons and caused severe injuries and thereafter ran away towards the<\/p>\n<p>jungle.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The report of the incident Ext.P-12 was lodged by Gayaprasad (PW-<\/p>\n<p>5). Fourteen external injuries were found on the body of the deceased. As<\/p>\n<p>per the opinion of the Autopsy Surgeon, the death of the deceased was<\/p>\n<p>caused due to extensive hemorrhage on account of shock due to injury No.8<\/p>\n<p>mainly and injury Nos. 13 and 14 causing hemorrhage. They were incised<\/p>\n<p>wounds. Since accused persons abjured guilt, trial was held. Each of the<\/p>\n<p>accused persons was convicted as noted above. Appeals were filed before<\/p>\n<p>the High Court. So far as the appellant is concerned, it was submitted that<\/p>\n<p>he could not be convicted in terms of Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC<\/p>\n<p>as only accused Nanhe, according to the prosecution, caused incised<\/p>\n<p>wounds. The appellant was holding only a stick. The High Court relied on<\/p>\n<p>the evidence of two eye-witnesses PWs 5 and 9 and held that the appellant<\/p>\n<p>cannot be held guilty of offence punishable under Section 302 read with<\/p>\n<p>Section 34 IPC. It was held that the prosecution has not proved that each of<\/p>\n<p>the participating culprits had the same intention and each one shared the<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                        3<\/span><br \/>\nintention of the other. The High Court noticed that the accused Prabhu and<\/p>\n<p>Jagdish had caused lacerated wounds and, therefore, the knowledge which<\/p>\n<p>can be inferred from the said acts is that they intended to cause grievous<\/p>\n<p>hurt. Accordingly, the conviction as noted above was altered.<\/p>\n<p>4.      Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant cannot<\/p>\n<p>be convicted in terms of Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC. It was<\/p>\n<p>submitted that none of the injuries were grievous hurts and the sentence in<\/p>\n<p>any way is very harsh.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>5.      Learned counsel for the respondent-State on the other hand supported<\/p>\n<p>the judgment.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>6.      Section 325 deals with punishment for voluntarily causing grievous<\/p>\n<p>hurt.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>7.      Section 326 deals with offence of voluntarily causing hurt by<\/p>\n<p>dangerous weapons or means.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                         4<\/span>\n<\/p>\n<p> 8.    Section 326 provides that whoever, except in the case provided for by<\/p>\n<p> Section 335, voluntarily causes grievous hurt by means of any instrument<\/p>\n<p> for shooting, stabbing or cutting, or any instrument which, used as a weapon<\/p>\n<p> of offence, is likely to cause death, or by means of fire or any corrosive<\/p>\n<p> substance, or by means of any explosive substance, or by means of any<\/p>\n<p> substance which is deleterious to the human body to inhale, to swallow, or<\/p>\n<p> to receive into the blood, or by means of any animal, shall be punished with<\/p>\n<p> imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a term<\/p>\n<p> which may extend to ten years, and also with a liability to pay a fine.<\/p>\n<p> 9.    Sections 325 and 326, like the two Sections immediately preceding,<\/p>\n<p> provide the ordinary punishment and punishment under certain aggravating<\/p>\n<p> circumstances of the offences mentioned thereunder.           The two latter<\/p>\n<p> Sections apply to the case of causing &#8220;grievous hurt&#8221; and the immediately<\/p>\n<p> preceding two Sections to the case of `hurt&#8217;.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>10.    &#8220;Grievous hurt&#8221; has been defined in Section 320 IPC, which read as<\/p>\n<p> follows:\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>              &#8220;320 Grievous Hurt &#8211; The following kinds of hurt only<br \/>\n              are designated as &#8220;grievous&#8221;-\n<\/p>\n<p>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                           5<\/span><br \/>\n             First &#8211; Emasculation.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Secondly &#8211; Permanent      privation of the sight of either<br \/>\n             eye.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Thirdly &#8211; Permanent privation of the hearing of either<br \/>\n             ear.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Fourthly &#8211; Privation of any member or joint.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Fifthly &#8211; Destruction or permanent impairing of the<br \/>\n             powers of any members or joint.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Sixthly &#8211; Permanent disfiguration of the head or face.<\/p>\n<p>             Seventhly &#8211; Fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth.<\/p>\n<p>             Eighthly &#8211; Any hurt which endangers life or which<br \/>\n             causes the sufferer to be during the space of twenty days<br \/>\n             in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary<br \/>\n             pursuits.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>11.   Some hurts which are not like those hurts which are mentioned in the<\/p>\n<p>first seven clauses, are obviously distinguished from a slight hurt, may<\/p>\n<p>nevertheless be more serious. Thus a wound may cause intense pain,<\/p>\n<p>prolonged disease or lasting injury to the victim, although it does not fall<\/p>\n<p>within any of the first seven clauses. Before a conviction for the sentence of<\/p>\n<p>grievous hurt can be passed, one of the injuries defined in Section 320 must<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                          6<\/span><br \/>\nbe strictly proved, and the eighth clause is no exception to the general rule<\/p>\n<p>of law that a penal statute must be construed strictly.<\/p>\n<p>12.   The expression &#8220;any instrument which, used as a weapon of offence,<\/p>\n<p>is likely to cause death&#8221; has to be gauged taking note of the heading of the<\/p>\n<p>Section. What would constitute a `dangerous weapon&#8217; would depend upon<\/p>\n<p>the facts of each case and no generalization can be made.<\/p>\n<p>13.   The heading of the Section provides some insight into the factors to<\/p>\n<p>be considered. The essential ingredients to attract Section 326 are : (1)<\/p>\n<p>voluntarily causing a hurt; (2) hurt caused must be a grievous hurt; and (3)<\/p>\n<p>the grievous hurt must have been caused by dangerous weapons or means.<\/p>\n<p>As was noted by this Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/724729\/\">State of U.P. v. Indrajeet Alias Sukhatha<\/a><\/p>\n<p>(2000(7) SCC 249) there is no such thing as a regular or earmarked weapon<\/p>\n<p>for committing murder or for that matter a hurt. Whether a particular article<\/p>\n<p>can per se cause any serious wound or grievous hurt or injury has to be<\/p>\n<p>determined factually. At this juncture, it would be relevant to note that in<\/p>\n<p>some provisions e.g. Sections 324 and 326 expression &#8220;dangerous weapon&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>is used. In some other more serious offences the expression used is &#8220;deadly<\/p>\n<p>weapon&#8221; (e.g. Sections 397 and 398). The facts involved in a particular<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                         7<\/span><br \/>\ncase, depending upon various factors like size, sharpness, would throw light<\/p>\n<p>on the question whether the weapon was a dangerous or deadly weapon or<\/p>\n<p>not. That would determine whether in the case Section 325 or Section 326<\/p>\n<p>would be applicable.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>14.   The above position was highlighted in <a href=\"\/doc\/1043893\/\">Mathai v. State of Kerala<\/a><\/p>\n<p>(2005 (2) JT 365).\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>15.   Considering the principles set out above, certainly the appellant was<\/p>\n<p>guilty of offence punishable under Section 326 read with Section 34 IPC.<\/p>\n<p>However, in the peculiar facts of the case, the sentence of 5 years rigorous<\/p>\n<p>imprisonment would meet the ends of justice.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>16.   The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent.<\/p>\n<p>                               &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..J.<br \/>\n                               (Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT)<\/p>\n<p>                               &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..J.<br \/>\n                               (Dr. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA)<br \/>\nNew Delhi,<br \/>\nDecember 3, 2008<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                                                                             8<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Prabhu vs State Of M.P on 3 December, 2008 Author: . A Pasayat Bench: Arijit Pasayat, Mukundakam Sharma REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1956 OF 2008 (Arising out of S.L.P (Crl.) No. 1418 OF 2008 Prabhu &#8230;Appellant Versus State of Madhya Pradesh &#8230;. [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-7756","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Prabhu vs State Of M.P on 3 December, 2008 - 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\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Prabhu vs State Of M.P on 3 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-12-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-05-30T21:10:41+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\\\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Prabhu vs State Of M.P on 3 December, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-30T21:10:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1318,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008\",\"name\":\"Prabhu vs State Of M.P on 3 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-30T21:10:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Prabhu vs State Of M.P on 3 December, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Prabhu vs State Of M.P on 3 December, 2008 - 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\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Prabhu vs State Of M.P on 3 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-12-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-05-30T21:10:41+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\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Prabhu vs State Of M.P on 3 December, 2008","datePublished":"2008-12-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-30T21:10:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008"},"wordCount":1318,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008","name":"Prabhu vs State Of M.P on 3 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-12-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-30T21:10:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/prabhu-vs-state-of-m-p-on-3-december-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Prabhu vs State Of M.P on 3 December, 2008"}]},{"@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\/7756","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=7756"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7756\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7756"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7756"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7756"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}