{"id":79966,"date":"2010-10-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010"},"modified":"2019-03-18T04:44:24","modified_gmt":"2019-03-17T23:14:24","slug":"jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"Jayakumar vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court<\/div>\n
Jayakumar vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT\nBANGALORE\n\nDATED THIS THE 29\"' DAY OF OCTOBER \nBEFORE   ii\"i\n\nTHE HON'BLE MRJUSTICE HULUVADl.--{eRA?i?{E\u00abS}1vL:\"  \n\nCRIMINAL APPEAL N 0.4f3\\30F29ii19:'i' 4'    A\n\nBETWEEN:\n\nJayakurnar,\n\nAged about 33 years,\nS\/0 Doddaiah,\nMatagere Village, V\nSargur Hobli,       - \nH.D.K0teTa1uEi_i, _ _    \n\n    ..APPELLANT\n(By M\/s.iP.Nataraj:.;_i\n\nAND} ~ \n\n i:Sta&t_ei of Karniataka,\n By Hunsur'T.Ow_n'POIice,\n\nR.e1:$reseh'ted_..by ~ State Public Prosecutor,\nHigh Court Buifding,\n\n  A Baiigalpra A ..RESPONDENT\n\nit iS.ri.(i}\"i.M.Srinivasa Reddy, HCG?)\n\nThis Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 374(2) of\n\n -\u00bbCr:.P.C. praying to set aside the judgment and order of\n ,  conviction dated 3.4.20E() passed by the IV Add}. District and\n\n*6?'\n\n\n\n-7\n\nx.\n\nSJ}, at Mysore, in S.C.No.1_08\/()9 --~ convicting the\nappellant\/accused for the offence P\/U\/S498-A, 341. and 307 of\nIPC and etc.,\n\nThis Criminal Appeal coming on for further hearing.o:th.is\nday, the Court delivered the following: ~ .   \n\nJUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
This appeal is by the :\u00ab.1c:cusec;’=4lchaliengingltlieiorderilypofil’<\/p>\n
conviction and sentence passedby the I’! Ada”l’LeVD:istric;t  <\/p>\n
Sessions Judge, Mysore, in convicting the”accuseci; for the
\noffence punishable underS:ections2,j_4\u00a78{–.\u00a3\u00a7v) 307 of IPC and
\nsentencing him tovundergo’ for a period<\/p>\n
of two years ‘foil  Section 498(A) of UPC and to<\/p>\n
undergo rigcii-ou.s ii\u00e9i.pris_onij_n’ent for five years and to pay a fine<\/p>\n
 of  ‘clefa11i.t to pay the fine, to undergo rigorous<\/p>\n
 for-.tw() months, for the offence punishable under<\/p>\n
sa:tit;’n 3i)7l?s_ts::’PC.\n<\/p>\n
*   It is stated, the accused was married to Sn1t.Pa.rvathi<\/p>\n
  _,,a..bout nine years prior to the incident and they were pe.r-rnanent<\/p>\n
V residents of M_atake1’e of H.D.Kote Taluk. Accused used to<\/p>\n
it”\n<\/p>\n
3<\/span>
\nsuspect her fidelity and whenever she talked with others, he<\/p>\n
used to doubt her. One year prior to the incident, they were
\nresiding separately in a house at Sadashivanakoppalu, Hunsur<\/p>\n
town, on the advice of the parents of P.W.5 . However,.__once<\/p>\n
again accused started suspecting her fidelity and   _<\/p>\n
her physically and mentally and he was not e.v’e’r1= <\/p>\n
to talk to her brothers. This fact wasl’-ainfoirmedlilsy <\/p>\n
parents P.Ws.6 and 7 and also liier\ufb01-2.nc]e\u00a7P_W.9,ss  * 0<\/p>\n
her stating that she has got  and askedv.herv’lto adjust<\/p>\n
with him. On the date the on 11.01.2009<\/p>\n
around 018.30′ ‘1 ni;7f’w.hlile ?.ar”\u00bb*atl”ii was at the house, accused<\/p>\n
picked up la*qsuai”rel .with’llieri’ and tried to stab her with a knife<\/p>\n
 ,_y_stat.i:nlg that she dloe’s,..not’ listen to him and that he suspects her<\/p>\n
 p_ich21i’ac,te1=.p_l’rA”t.,th’at time, P.W.5 tried to escape and ran away<\/p>\n
froafillthevholuls_.e,l’ but accused having chased her, caught hold of<\/p>\n
 -‘~___l”-her neaif\ufb01iadeshwarzi temple and stabbed her with knife on her<\/p>\n
l’l.e1″\u00a3..c:hest, back and right rib and caused injuries. When she<\/p>\n
0′ = .\u00bbvi’aised a cry, on hearing the same, one Mahadeva, her brother,<\/p>\n
one Ramesh, D.Kumara and Bhoja came there and separated<\/p>\n
3*?’\/’<\/p>\n
the accused and pacified him. Later, the injured was taken to<\/p>\n
the Government Hospital, Hunsui’, by her younger–:bro’the’rV<\/p>\n
P.W.l and from there, she was shifted to <\/p>\n
Mysore. When she was taking :ireatn’\u00a7envtl”.at-I’Gov-erniniepnt<\/p>\n
Hospital, Hunsur, the police officials ot”Hunsur to.Wli:.\\}’isiited; the <\/p>\n
hospital and recorded the statemelntV~l.of P_.uW.5  presence of
\nDoctor as per Ex.P6  _in\\\/estig._l:iation and
\nconducing scene Ofv  collecting the
\n   for the offences
\npunishal\u00a716..Ulldcr:’   307 of IPC before the
\nJMFC,  the case to the Sessions<\/p>\n
Court. ‘UItilrtr1ately,rtheicasell-riiwas disposed of by the IV Addl.<\/p>\n
‘”~._\u00bbSess_iolns_J_pudge, l\\\/llysere,”convicting the accused. Hence, this<\/p>\n
?\u00a5tHp\u00a2i1’f:.  i<\/p>\n
3:  ard.\n<\/p>\n
4. According to the learned Counsel for the accused<\/p>\n
it ~ fexcept the version of the complainant. no other evidence is<\/p>\n
61%,.\n<\/p>\n
available on record regarding the accused causing the incident.
\nAs per the opinion of the Doctor, the injuries suffered by her<\/p>\n
are simple in nature. The alleged incident has taken placeiafter<\/p>\n
nine years of marriage and it is only due to diii’fereVnc_e5g)_f<\/p>\n
opinion between P.W.5 and the accused. The     <\/p>\n
falsely implicated in this case. He isiin c_ustody.siince orie-.ye’ar_*<\/p>\n
and ten months. Accordingly;:_he._sought ‘for of the 2 L’<\/p>\n
accused.\n<\/p>\n
5. Per–covnt.ra,v..the  Pleader has submitted<\/p>\n
that, there is as_pririia_facie–ca’se’ against the accused for having<\/p>\n
attempted tio\u00ab-ce1n1niit._the_viriiiader of P.W.5, his wife. There is no<\/p>\n
 ._v_illegallity__Toi’_err()ti’com.mitted by the learned Sessions Judge in<\/p>\n
 L’iconi\\\/’icitingl accused. Accordingly, he sought for dismissal of<\/p>\n
the aiipeal .. i   <\/p>\n
it *   Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties, the<\/p>\n
 V. …p.oints that would arise for my consideration are:<\/p>\n
W<\/p>\n
(i)<\/p>\n
(ii)<\/p>\n
(iii)<\/p>\n
(iv)<\/p>\n
Whether the prosecution is able to prove the case
\nagainst the accused beyond reasonabie doubts-o as
\nto hold him guilty of the offences punishahvle_iu.nder
\nSections 498(A) and 307 of IPC’? ‘   <\/p>\n
Whether the trial Court has com1nitted”any:.error or i
\nin convicti.ng~~ and I sente’rr1I<:4inig'.__:t.hev.i<\/p>\n
perversity
\naccused'?\n<\/p>\n
Whether the impugned orderi’passed’i’i’tQy,:4the trial <\/p>\n
Court calls for interference’?\n<\/p>\n
What order?\n<\/p>\n
7. The pr_oser;yu\u00a7t’ion”in :11?’has”eitar2iined 18 witnesses and<\/p>\n
got marked ahvout ‘W114  and .C)s.l to 3. At the outset,<\/p>\n
the Vers:i.Qn’–of injured who is examined as
\nP.W.5 is thaiti,’—shes to the accused nine years prior to
\n‘”~._the  i..ncident”a:-id was residing with him at his place.
\n  to doubt her fidelity, she intimated this fact
\nto after marriage, for about two years she was<\/p>\n
 ‘ ‘~.__iv’1=esiding with the accused and thereafter, her brother took her to
\n ‘parents house and she was residing there for some time.<\/p>\n
 ” -Later after convening a panchayath, the accused and the injured<\/p>\n
A were made to stay at her parents’ place. Thereafter atso accused<\/p>\n
J14:-W<\/p>\n
7<\/span>
\ncontinued to suspect her and used to say that the children were<\/p>\n
born to some other person and not to hint and in this regard. she<\/p>\n
has aiso lodged a complaint at Hunsur police station ‘and<\/p>\n
conducting panchayath there she was sent   ii<\/p>\n
accused wherein he. had agreed to icjoi-i ‘:tf:\u00bb=~_,~<\/p>\n
Thereafter, the alleged incident has ‘taken p1ac.eiA.at’ Hunsiur,i’–..<\/p>\n
where they both were residing.\n<\/p>\n
8. P.Ws.6 and 7 areparents”iofiPtW:5 and they are
\nhearsay witnes.ses\u00a7i’i’ hey 1’havespokeniiiiiiabout the accused
\nassaulting ‘theiriida:ughteii'”–a.and.’ aiso according to them, the<\/p>\n
accused had ~assa.uEted *r>ammi when she was pregnant for the<\/p>\n
” =  _third_’i3:hi}.d, due to there was a miscarriage.<\/p>\n
i’   and 2 are the brothers of the complainant.<\/p>\n
   also spoken about the overt act of the accused and<\/p>\n
 _i’ha1’as_s’ing their sister Parvathi suspecting her fideiity.<\/p>\n
-JV<\/p>\n
s\n<\/p>\n
10. P.W.9 is the uncie of the compiainant. P.Ws.3. 4. 8<\/p>\n
and 10 are the panch witnesses for the scene of offence<\/p>\n
pancharaaina. P.Ws.8, 9, 13 and 14 are also the eyewithesses..<\/p>\n
P.W.i2 is a hearsay witness who came to know oiithe.ineide11t.i_f <\/p>\n
P.W.l5 is the doctor who examined !.;heiiiinju.r_ed. <\/p>\n
owner of the house where the accused and the.$’_eomp1aitaa’nt <\/p>\n
were residing. P.Ws.l7 and 1i8*.,are theii’pe_rs’ori:s ti\ufb01ho have
\nregistered the case andpfiied fthe:vchai’ge’\u00ab.%sheet against the<\/p>\n
accused.     ‘<\/p>\n
 TheVeiiidenee.::of_:iE’.VV.i5–Dr.Arunkumar is to the<\/p>\n
effect that, has treated’ the-~’iinjured on I 1.01.2009 around 8.50<\/p>\n
 v .Veom;i.iiaiva.e.di’oi’ assault by her husband with a knife.<\/p>\n
 fTheTD0c’i;o_rthaanoticed as many as four incised wounds on the<\/p>\n
right_chest..ileijichest and to the ribs on the right side and also<\/p>\n
 the back. The opinion given by the Doctor is that the injuries<\/p>\n
 _dare–.sirnpIe in nature. Later, for further treatment she was<\/p>\n
 .referred to K.R.HospitaL Mysore.\n<\/p>\n
J?”\n<\/p>\n
E2. P.W.3 is the pancha for the seizure of knife at the<\/p>\n
scene of offence, as per Ex.P5. Although, he has supp.o’rtedi_ithe<\/p>\n
prosecution in his examination in chief, but he has  ‘<\/p>\n
the version of the defense in the cross-+e’xaininatio_n anr.i_ pieafcieci.’<\/p>\n
his ignorance as to the contents of m.aha;ar_anci seizure of <\/p>\n
P.W.4 _is the pancha for the   as
\nper Ex.P~4 and has partly   of the
\nprosecution regarding the  ‘Ath_’ei__’.feiatives of the
\ninjured have    vpyosecution.\n<\/p>\n
   eyewitness and has spoken<\/p>\n
about witneissiing the ii3_ci’i\u00e9e}nt. According to him, on healing<\/p>\n
 the wentAtovt..h,e’spot and found that the accused was<\/p>\n
 on her chest and ribs. Later himself, one<\/p>\n
Kur13ara,V..Jafgaraiah, Bhoja, Kempeeraiah and Mahadeva<\/p>\n
 ‘*.__f”‘\u00bbgathere\u00e9V__tne1*e and have separated the quarrel and shifted the<\/p>\n
  –iri}’ereti to the hospitai.\n<\/p>\n
3%,?’<\/p>\n
\u00a34. P.W.9–Shivanna, the uncle of the injured, has also<\/p>\n
spoken about the alleged harassment to the injureri”by”-._t’Ize<\/p>\n
accused and he also is said to have advised the a=:c’used::;ot to\u00bb V’<\/p>\n
harass the injured.\n<\/p>\n
15. Apart from the versioni”‘o.fthe injure_d,’etliere_are some<\/p>\n
independent witnesses,  haiiie vviabout the quarrel that<\/p>\n
has taken place betweenthe_inju’red:._aridv,the–‘iae’cused often and<\/p>\n
about the acctised asnsaultingj  injured isiusjaecting her fidelity.
\n  on’ record, it transpires that the<\/p>\n
accused  suspectedjthe fidelity of his wife, used to<\/p>\n
    assault ‘he.r..and that on the date of the incident the<\/p>\n
 _ accjused–has.”assaulted her with a knife and she has sustained in<\/p>\n
all,__ij  injuries and initially, she was shifted to<\/p>\n
 Goveriirnent Hospital, Hunsur and thereafter, to K.R.Hospital,<\/p>\n
ii –..i\\%iys.ore. The injures on the body of the injured clearly point<\/p>\n
i ” \u00bb-oiut that they were caused with an intention to cause grievous<\/p>\n
hurt suspecting her fidelity. Whether, he had a real. intention of<\/p>\n
J1{;,\/<\/p>\n
11<\/span>
\n\ufb01nishing her of is rather difficult to ascertain in the context. It<\/p>\n
appears, there was frequent quarrel between the husbandand<\/p>\n
wife and that the accused used to suspect her fidelity <\/p>\n
to harass her physically and mentally and that,  <\/p>\n
i_ncident, he has assaulted her with themknife, 7wh.ich,:’is. _evident”.<\/p>\n
from the evidence of the injured. and other~.witnesS’esi, “The ‘i\/eiy V’<\/p>\n
assault on the Vital part of the   that
\nthe accused, with an  niust have
\ncommitted the offence.   Court has
\nrightly crinvicteidi   punishable under<\/p>\n
Sectionl498–(A) giitd\u00a7’;3,0j’t  L’ r<\/p>\n
‘i'<.l'Z,,:"l"h__e accuse-dmizs said to be in custody since more than<\/p>\n
 _()rie,i_5\/ear—and'i'lten"–3f13()nths. The prosecution is able to prove the<\/p>\n
case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt, so also the<\/p>\n
i"'*.__l"'trAiayl Court has rightly convicted the accused. So far as<\/p>\n
 _ ii.n1po.s'ing sentence is concerned, having regard to the nature of<\/p>\n
ii " -"li1jUI.'l6S sustained by the injured which are said to be simple in<\/p>\n
nature, although the accused has assaulted with a knife, it<\/p>\n
1')<\/p>\n
would meet the ends of justice, if the sentence. awarded for the<\/p>\n
offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC is reduced to<\/p>\n
rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years :.1n\u00a33_to_'pefyda V.<\/p>\n
fine of Rs.l0,000\/~, in default, to undergo simpleoiiirrtpriisoninienti  i <\/p>\n
for six months. The sentence ordered :foi"j.th'e <\/p>\n
Section 498(A) of Il3C remains' u.naitere:l_ii"  tlie <\/p>\n
sentences are ordered to run con_oui're11tly.  is entitled
\nfor the benefit of set off for the  detention already
\nundergone duringthe peri'od"of air-idtriial, as per Section<\/p>\n
428 of Cr.P,C'.  *ilf.i_  " ],j  <\/p>\n
55,5<\/p>\n
IiiTc1\u00a7\u00e9<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Karnataka High Court Jayakumar vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2010 Author: Huluvadi G.Ramesh IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE DATED THIS THE 29″‘ DAY OF OCTOBER BEFORE ii”i THE HON’BLE MRJUSTICE HULUVADl.–{eRA?i?{E\u00abS}1vL:” CRIMINAL APPEAL N 0.4f3\\30F29ii19:’i’ 4′ A BETWEEN: Jayakurnar, Aged about 33 years, S\/0 Doddaiah, Matagere Village, V Sargur Hobli, […]<\/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":[8,20],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-79966","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-karnataka-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nJayakumar vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2010 - 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\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Jayakumar vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-10-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-17T23:14:24+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Jayakumar vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-17T23:14:24+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1838,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Karnataka High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010\",\"name\":\"Jayakumar vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-17T23:14:24+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jayakumar vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Jayakumar vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2010 - 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\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Jayakumar vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-17T23:14:24+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Jayakumar vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-17T23:14:24+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010"},"wordCount":1838,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Karnataka High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010","name":"Jayakumar vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-17T23:14:24+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/jayakumar-vs-state-of-karnataka-on-29-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jayakumar vs State Of Karnataka on 29 October, 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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/79966","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=79966"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/79966\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=79966"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=79966"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=79966"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}