{"id":80020,"date":"2009-08-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-08-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009"},"modified":"2015-11-09T12:23:01","modified_gmt":"2015-11-09T06:53:01","slug":"rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009","title":{"rendered":"Rajamani Iyer vs The Commissioner Of Police on 24 August, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Rajamani Iyer vs The Commissioner Of Police on 24 August, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 24\/08\/2009\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.MURGESEN\nAND\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN\n\nH.C.P.(MD) No.368 of 2009\n\nRajamani Iyer\t\t\t\t\t..\tPetitioner\n\nVs\n\n1.The Commissioner of Police,\n  Tirunelveli City.\n\n2.The Secretary to the Government,\n  Home, Prohibition and Excise Department,\n  Fort St.George,\n  Chennai-600 009.\n\n2.The Inspector of Police,\n  Wooraiyur Police Station,\n  Trichy District.\t\t\t\t..\tRespondents\n\n\nHabeas Corpus Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of\nIndia calling for the entire records pertaining to the order of detention passed\nby the 1st respondent vide his Proceedings in C.P.O\/T.C \/I.S\/D.O. No.05\/2009\ndated 04.02.2009 and quash the same and consequently set the detenu by name\nKannan @ Kannabiran, S\/o Rajamani Iyer, Male Aged 32 years, who is kept in\nCentral Prison, Trichy at liberty.\n\n!For Petitioner \t.. Mr.R.Anand\n^For Respondents        .. Mr.N.Senthur Pandian,\n\t\t           Addl.Public Prosecutor\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>(Order of the Court was made by P.MURGESEN, J.)<br \/>\n\tThe petitioner is the father of the detenu, who was detained under Section<br \/>\n3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Drug-<br \/>\noffenders, Forest-offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic offenders, Sand Offenders,<br \/>\nSlum-grabbers and Video Pirates Act, 1982 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982), by order<br \/>\nof the first respondent in Order No. C.P.O\/T.C\/I.S\/D.O.No.05\/2009 dated<br \/>\n04.02.2009 by branding him as a &#8216;GOONDA&#8217;.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. There are two adverse cases and one ground case as against the detenu.<br \/>\nThe details of the adverse cases are as under:-\n<\/p>\n<pre>Sl.             Police Station and         Section of Law\nNo.             Crime Number\n\n1.            Tiruchirapalli Woraiyur      397 IPC.\n              Police Station\n              Crime No.618 of 2008\n\n2.            Tiruchirapalli Woraiyur      387 and 506(ii) IPC.\n              Police Station\n              Crime No.635 of 2008\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>The ground case was registered under Section 397 IPC in Crime No.742 of 2008 on<br \/>\nthe file of Woraiyur Police Station, Tiruchirapalli. In the ground case, the<br \/>\ndetenu was arrested on 27.12.2008 and sent to judicial custody on the same day<br \/>\nand he was remanded till 09.01.2009. Thereafter, his remand period was extended<br \/>\nupto 06.02.2009.  The detention order was passed on 04.02.2009.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. Learned counsel for the petitioner challenges the impugned order of<br \/>\ndetention on three grounds; firstly, the remand report was not furnished to the<br \/>\ndetenu; secondly, the Detaining Authority had not satisfied itself as to the<br \/>\nreal possibility of the detenu coming out on bail; thirdly, there was a delay in<br \/>\nconsidering the representation of the detenu.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. The first ground of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the<br \/>\nremand report was not furnished to the detenu in the first adverse case.  In the<br \/>\nfirst adverse case, in Crime No.618 of 2008, the detenu was remanded on<br \/>\n27.12.2008 and later the remand period was extended till 06.02.2009, for which<br \/>\nthe remand orders were not furnished to the detenu.  It is submitted by the<br \/>\nlearned Additional Public Prosecutor that the remand reports were furnished in<br \/>\nthe booklet. On a perusal of the booklet, we find no remand report for Crime<br \/>\nNo.618 of 2008 is available. Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the<br \/>\ndecision of the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court reported in 1999 Supreme Court Cases (Cri)<br \/>\n231 (Powanammal v. State of T.N. and Another).  In that case, it was pointed out<br \/>\nby the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court that the relied-on documents must be furnished to<br \/>\nthe detenu and non-supply of the same would be fatal. Since the remand report<br \/>\npertaining to Crime No.618 of 2008, which was relied upon by the Detaining<br \/>\nAuthority was not furnished to the detenu, the order of detention is liable to<br \/>\nbe set aside on this ground.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. In the grounds of detention, it is stated that the detenu filed bail<br \/>\napplications in Crl.M.P. Nos.106\/09 and 105\/09 for Woraiyur Police Station Crime<br \/>\nNos.742 of 2008 and 618 of 2008 respectively before the District and Sessions<br \/>\nCourt, Tiruchirapalli and the same were dismissed on 22.01.2009 and therefore,<br \/>\nthere was a real possibility of the detenu coming out on bail.  For this, the<br \/>\nlearned counsel for the petitioner relied on a decision of the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme<br \/>\nCourt in the case of T.V.Sravanan v. State, reported in (2006) 1 Supreme Court<br \/>\nCases (Cri) 593. In that case the bail applications moved by the appellant had<br \/>\nbeen rejected by the courts and there was no material whatsoever to apprehend<br \/>\nthat the detenu was likely to move a bail application or that there was imminent<br \/>\npossibility of the prayer for bail being granted.  Therefore, in that case, it<br \/>\nwas held that the &#8220;imminent&#8221; possibility of the appellant coming out on bail was<br \/>\nmerely the ipsi dixit of the detaining authority unsupported by any material<br \/>\nwhatsoever; there was no cogent material before the detaining authority on the<br \/>\nbasis of which the detaining authority could be satisfied that the detenu was<br \/>\nlikely to be released on bail; the inference has to be drawn from the available<br \/>\nmaterial on record; in the absence of such material on record the mere ipse<br \/>\ndixit of the detaining authority is not sufficient to sustain the order of<br \/>\ndetention; there was, therefore, no sufficient compliance with the requirements<br \/>\nas laid down by the Supreme Court.  Relying on the above judgment of the Hon&#8217;ble<br \/>\nSupreme Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the<br \/>\norder of detention is vitiated on the ground that the detaining authority had<br \/>\npassed the order without its subjective satisfaction as regards the imminent<br \/>\npossibility of the detenu coming out on bail.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. Applying the principles enunciated in the Sravanan&#8217;s case (cited supra)<br \/>\nto the facts of the present case, we are of the considered view that the<br \/>\nimpugned order of detention is vitiated also on the ground that the Detaining<br \/>\nAuthority had not satisfied itself as regards the imminent possibility of the<br \/>\ndetenu coming out on bail.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. The third ground relied on by the counsel for the petitioner is that<br \/>\nthere was delay in considering the representation of the detenu.  In the<br \/>\nproforma submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, with regard to<br \/>\nthe first representation of the detenu, it is stated that the file was submitted<br \/>\non 26.02.2009; Under Secretary dealt with on 26.02.2009; Joint Secretary dealt<br \/>\nwith on 26.02.2009; Minister for PWD and Law dealt with the representation on<br \/>\n27.02.2009; rejection letter prepared on 04.03.2009; rejection letter sent to<br \/>\nthe detenu on 05.03.2009 and rejection letter served to the detenu on<br \/>\n06.03.2009. 21.02.2009, 22.02.2009 and 01.03.2009 were public holidays.  Even<br \/>\nthough the Minister for PWD and Law dealt with the representation on 27.02.2009,<br \/>\nthe rejection letter was sent to the detenu only on 05.03.2009. A perusal of the<br \/>\ncolumns 13 to 16 of the proforma would show that there was delay in considering<br \/>\nthe representation of the detenu.  The delay was also not explained properly<br \/>\nwith reason. Therefore, we are of the view that on this ground also, the<br \/>\ndetention order is liable to be set aside.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. For all the above reasons, we are of the considered view this H.C.P is<br \/>\nliable to be allowed and accordingly it is allowed and the order of detention in<br \/>\nOrder No.C.P.O\/T.C\/I.S\/D.O.No.05\/2009 dated 04.02.2009  passed by the first<br \/>\nrespondent is set aside. The detenu is directed to be released forthwith unless<br \/>\nhis presence is required in connection with any other case.\n<\/p>\n<p>KM<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.The Commissioner of Police,<br \/>\n  Tirunelveli City.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The Secretary to the Government,<br \/>\n  Government of Tamil Nadu,<br \/>\n  Home, Prohibition and Excise Department,<br \/>\n  Fort St.George,<br \/>\n  Chennai-600 009.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.The Inspector of Police,<br \/>\n  Wooraiyur Police Station,<br \/>\n  Trichy District.\t\t\t<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Rajamani Iyer vs The Commissioner Of Police on 24 August, 2009 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 24\/08\/2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.MURGESEN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.KARNAN H.C.P.(MD) No.368 of 2009 Rajamani Iyer .. Petitioner Vs 1.The Commissioner of Police, Tirunelveli City. 2.The Secretary to the Government, Home, [&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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-80020","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Rajamani Iyer vs The Commissioner Of Police on 24 August, 2009 - 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\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rajamani Iyer vs The Commissioner Of Police on 24 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-08-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-09T06:53:01+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\\\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Rajamani Iyer vs The Commissioner Of Police on 24 August, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-09T06:53:01+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1058,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009\",\"name\":\"Rajamani Iyer vs The Commissioner Of Police on 24 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-09T06:53:01+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Rajamani Iyer vs The Commissioner Of Police on 24 August, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Rajamani Iyer vs The Commissioner Of Police on 24 August, 2009 - 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\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rajamani Iyer vs The Commissioner Of Police on 24 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-08-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-09T06:53:01+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\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Rajamani Iyer vs The Commissioner Of Police on 24 August, 2009","datePublished":"2009-08-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-09T06:53:01+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009"},"wordCount":1058,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009","name":"Rajamani Iyer vs The Commissioner Of Police on 24 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-09T06:53:01+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajamani-iyer-vs-the-commissioner-of-police-on-24-august-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Rajamani Iyer vs The Commissioner Of Police on 24 August, 2009"}]},{"@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\/80020","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=80020"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/80020\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=80020"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=80020"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=80020"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}