{"id":80104,"date":"2009-10-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009"},"modified":"2014-07-08T07:29:36","modified_gmt":"2014-07-08T01:59:36","slug":"v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"V.A.Chelliah vs State on 14 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
V.A.Chelliah vs State on 14 October, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED : 14\/10\/2009\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM\n\nCrl.A.(MD)No.142 of 2000\nand Crl.A.(MD)No. 143 of 2000\n\n\n1.V.A.Chelliah\t\t\t.. Appellant in\n\t\t\t\t   Crl.A.No.142 of 2000\/A1\n\n2.Chinnakkannu\t\t\t.. Appellant in\n\t\t\t\t   Crl.A.No.143 of 2000\/A2\n\t\t\t\nVs\n\n\nState, rep. by the\nInspector of Police,\nVigilance and Anti Corruption,\nPudukottai.\t\t\n\t\t\t\t.. Respondent in both<\/pre>\n
\t\t\t\t   Crl.As.\/Complainant<\/p>\n
Common Prayer<\/p>\n
Criminal appeals are filed under Section 374(2) of Cr.P.C.,
\nagainst the judgment dated 27.01.2000 passed in Special C.C.No.1 of 1996 by the
\nlearned Special Judge cum Additional Sessions cum Chief Judicial Magistrate,
\nPudukottai.\n<\/p>\n
!For appellants\t   ...\t Mr.R.Shanmughasundaram\n in both Crl.As.\t Senior counsel for\n\t\t\t for Mr.S.Ravi\n\t\t\n^For respondent\t   ...   Mr.P.Rajendran\nin both Crl.As.\t\t Govt. Advocate (Crl. side)\n\n* * * * *\n\n:COMMON JUDGMENT\n\n<\/pre>\n
\tThese criminal appeals have been preferred against the judgment dated
\n27.01.2000 passed in Special C.C.No.1 of 1996 by the learned Special Judge cum
\nAdditional Sessions cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pudukottai.\n<\/p>\n
\t2. The accused were charged under Sections 7 and 13(2) r\/w.13(1)(d) of the
\nPrevention of Corruption Act.\n<\/p>\n
\t3. The learned Special Judge cum Additional Sessions Judge cum Chief
\nJudicial Magistrate, Pudukottai was pleased to convict the accused for offences
\nunder Sections 7 and 13(2) r\/w.13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and
\nsentence them as follows:\n<\/p>\n
Accused           Offence                       Sentence<\/p>\n
A1         7 and 13(2) r\/w.13(1)(d)   To undergo rigorous imprisonment for
\n           of the Prevention of       two years and to pay fine of Rs.1000\/-
\n           Corruption Act             i\/d.to undergo rigorous imprisonment
\n                                      for ten months under Section 7  of
\n                                      the Prevention of Corruption Act  and
\n                                      to undergo rigorous imprisonment for
\n                                      three years and to pay fine of Rs.2000\/-\n<\/p>\n
                                      i\/d. to undergo simple imprisonment
\n                                      for ten months.\n<\/p>\n
A2        7 and 13(2) r\/w.13(1)(d)    To undergo rigorous imprisonment for two
\n          of the Prevention of        years and to pay fine of Rs.1000\/- i\/d.
\n          Corruption Act              to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten
\n                                      months under Section 7 of the
\n                                      Prevention of Corruption Act and to
\n                                      undergo rigorous imprisonment for three
\n                                      years and to pay fine of Rs.2000\/- i\/d.\n<\/p>\n
                                      to undergo simple imprisonment for ten
\n                                      months.\n<\/p>\n
\t4. The prosecution case is as follows:\n<\/p>\n
\t(a) The first accused worked as Village Administrative Officer and the
\nsecond accused worked as Village Menial of Kathalur Village of Pudukkottai
\nDistrict.  P.W.1, Elumalai, P.W.4, Veeran, P.W.5, Vellaikannu are brothers and
\nP.W.6, Nallu is their paternal uncle.  All of them are residents of
\nAkkalnayakkanpatti Village.  During March, 1995, they have encroached upon
\nGovernment poramboke land and put up huts for their habitation.  The first and
\nsecond accused visited the said place along with Alagan, another Village Menial
\nand questioned them on 28.03.1995.  The accused dismantled the huts and directed
\nP.Ws.1,4 and 6 to come and meet him at his office on the next day.  Accordingly
\nP.Ws.1,4 and 6 went to the office of the first accused, where they were informed
\nthat they should not put up huts in the place encroached by them, but he would
\npoint out some other place and towards the same the first accused demanded a sum
\nof Rs.2000\/- from them.  They have pleaded that they are coolies and not in a
\nposition to pay Rs.2000\/-.  Finally, after a bargain Rs.600\/- was agreed upon.
\nA2 Chellakannu, who was present demanded Rs.100\/- separately for himself.  Both
\nthe accused informed them that they should come and meet them with money.\n<\/p>\n
\t(b) P.Ws.1,4 and 6 consulted each other and found themselves uninterested
\nin putting up huts in the place shown by the accused, since it was near a
\ngraveyard.  P.Ws.4 to 6 informed P.W.1 that a complaint was to be preferred to
\nthe vigilance police.  They have directed P.W.1 to lodge the complaint.  Each of
\nthem contributed a sum of Rs.175\/- and directed him to prefer the complaint.  On
\n18.04.1995 at about 08.00 a.m. P.W.1 preferred a complaint Ex.P1 to Vigilance
\nand Anti Corruption Police and a case in Crime No.1 of 1995 was registered by
\nP.W.9, Inspector of Police.  Ex.P16 is the printed First Information Report.
\nP.W.9 obtained permission from his superiors for further action.  P.W.9 arranged
\nfor official witnesses.  P.W.3, Junior Assistant of TWAD Board and another
\nwitness one Radhakrishnan, Junior Assistant, World Bank Plan – II, Pudukkottai
\nassisted P.W.9 in the trap proceedings.  The entrustment mahazar prepared at the
\noffice of P.W.9 is Ex.P3.  At about 12.10 hours P.W.1 along with P.W.3 left
\nPudukkottai and went to the office of the accused.  A1 was present in the
\noffice.  The first accused informed them that the second accused had gone
\noutside and directed them to bring the second accused.  When they were coming
\ndown the staircase, they saw the second accused climbing up.  P.W.2 informed
\nhim.  The second accused asked P.W.1 whether he had brought the amount as
\ndemanded by him.  P.W.1 replied in the positive.  The second accused informed
\nP.W.2 that he should pay Rs.100\/- to him and Rs.600\/- to the first accused.
\nThereafter all of them went inside and met the first accused.  The first accused
\nasked whether PW1 had brought the money.  P.W.1 replied that he had and paid
\nRs.600\/- to the first accused.  The first accused enquired about P.W.3.  P.W.1
\ninformed him that he was working along with him in a pattarai.  P.W.1 asked the
\nfirst accused to point out the place to put up a hut immediately and left the
\noffice.\n<\/p>\n
\t(c) On signal from P.W.1, P.W.9 Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti
\nCorruption came into the office of the accused.  P.W.9 asked P.W.1 to identify
\nthe first and second accused.  P.W.9 asked P.W.1 to leave the office and wait
\noutside.  P.W.9 introduced himself to the accused.  P.W.9 questioned the accused
\nabout the receipt of money.  P.W.9 conducted phenolphthalein test and the hands
\nof the first accused, turned pink.  The money of Rs.600\/- was seized from the
\nleft side pocket of the first accused and verified with the entrustment mahazar.
\nThe shirt was subjected to phenolphthalein test and the same also turned pink.
\nP.W.9 questioned the second accused about Rs.100\/- and seized Rs.100\/- from
\nM.O.5 paper.  P.W.9 recovered the money and conducted phenolphthalein test,
\nwhich proved positive.  Thereafter P.W.9 conducted a further phenolphthalein
\ntest and both hands of the second accused, turned pink.  The amount seized from
\nboth the accused was seized under Ex.P6.  P.W.9 prepared Observation Mahazar
\nEx.P7 and Rough Sketch Ex.P17.  P.W.9 along with accused went to the office of
\nthe Revenue Inspector and seized certain records.  At about 16.30 hours the
\nprosecution party left Viralimali and went to Akkalnayakkanpatti Village.  P.W.9
\ninspected the poromboke land and prepared Observation Mahazar.  P.W.9 took
\nphotogrph of the said place.  P.W.9 arrested the first and second accused and
\nconducted search at their houses under Ex.P8 and P9.  Nothing incriminating
\nagainst the accused was seized.  Thereafter P.W.9 released the accused on bail
\nand directed them to appear before the Court on summons and handed over the
\ninvestigation to P.W.10, Inspector, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Wing for
\nfurther investigation.  P.W.10, who took the investigation, examined  witnesses
\nand after completion of investigation sent the file to the office of the
\nDirectorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption on 29.09.1995.  P.W.2, Revenue
\nDivisional Officer met P.W.10 and verified certain records towards according
\nsanction.  P.W.10 after obtaining sanction Ex.P4 from P.W.2 filed the final
\nreport for offences under Sections 7 and 13(2) r\/w. 13(1)(d) of Prevention of
\nCorruption Act, 1988.\n<\/p>\n
\t(d) During the course of trial, to establish the case of the prosecution
\nP.W.1 to P.W.10 were examined. Exs.P1 to 20 and M.Os.1 to 10 were marked.
\nP.Ws.4 to 7 did not support the case of the prosecution and were declared
\nhostile by the prosecution.\n<\/p>\n
\t(e) When questioned on the evidence against them, the accused denied the
\ncharges.\n<\/p>\n
\t5. On appreciation of evidence and material on record, the trial Court has
\nconvicted the appellants\/accused as afore stated and hence the appeal.\n<\/p>\n
\t6. From the evidence,  it is seen that P.Ws.4 and 5 are brothers of P.W.1,
\nthe complainant and P.W.6 is their paternal uncle.  They have turned hostile.
\nP.W.7 is the photographer, who also has also turned hostile.\n<\/p>\n
\t7. Heard Mr.R.Shanmugasundaram, learned senior counsel for Mr.S.Ravil,
\nlearned counsel for the appellants\/ accused and the learned Government Advocate,
\non the submissions of the learned senior counsel.\n<\/p>\n
\t8. The primary attack on the prosecution case is that the sanction for
\nprosecution Ex.P4 is bad in law.  P.W.2 is the sanctioning authority.  In
\nevidence, he has admitted to not being satisfied that the present was a case in
\nwhich prosecution could be deservedly sanctioned.  As he suspected the truth of
\nthe prosecution case, he called the Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti
\nCorruption Wing, sought explanation, perused the Prevention of Corruption Act,
\n1988 and then accorded sanction after a period of 420 days.  He has admitted
\nthat on discussion with the Inspector, he was not satisfied towards granting
\nsanction.  As rightly contented by the learned senior counsel, there is no
\nmaterial on record to show what are the areas of suspicion entertained by the
\nsanctioning authority and how he finally arrived at satisfaction towards
\ngranting sanction as there against.  The non-application of mind on the part of
\nthe sanctioning authority is also reflected by his referring to P.W.3 in Ex.P4
\nas Junior Engineer, whereas in fact P.W.3 is only a Junior Assistant.  The
\nsanction order suffers also from one other defect.  It reads as if the first
\naccused had made a demand of bribe both for himself as also the second accused.
\nA perusal of Ex.P1 complaint would show that separate demands were made, the
\nfirst by the first accused and then an independent demand by the second accused.
\nSuch is the position, which is reflected also from the evidence.   In such
\ncircumstances, it may be said that according of sanction in respect of both the
\naccused by one and the same sanction order would prejudice the accused.  This
\nwould be more so in respect of the first accused, since the sanction order
\nreflects the position that it was he who made the demand on behalf of both the
\naccused.\n<\/p>\n
\t9. The further discrepancy in the prosecution case is that according to
\nExs.P3 and P6 mahazars, P.W.1 was accompanied to the trap scene by P.W.3.  But
\nin his deposition P.W.1 has spoken to having been accompanied by one
\nRadhakrishnan, who had not been examined.  A reading of the evidence of P.W.1
\ngoes to show that he knew both these persons viz., Radhakrishnan and P.W.3
\nSethuraman.  The finding of the trial Court is that P.W.1 was accompanied to the
\ntrap scene by P.W.3.  However, the questioning of the accused under Section 313
\nCr.P.C. is to the effect that P.W.1 was accompanied by one Radhakrishnan, who
\nwas not examined.  P.W.3 is the material prosecution witness.  He is the
\nprosecution witness to the trap and the non-questioning of the accused as to the
\nrole allegedly played by him certainly would cause serious prejudice and the
\naccused is entitled to complain thereagainst.  In this regard, useful reference
\nmay be had to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Shaikh Maqsood v.
\nState of Maharashtra,<\/a> 2009(4) Supreme 429, where it is held that:
\n\t“9.The importance of observing faithfully and fairly the provision of
\nSection 313 of the Code cannot be too strongly stressed.  It is not sufficient
\ncompliance to string together a long series of facts and ask the accused what he
\nhas to say about them.  He must be questioned separately about each material
\nsubstance which is intended to be used against him.  The questioning must be
\nfair and couched in a form which an ignorant or illiterate person will be able
\nto appreciate and understand.  Even when an accused is not illiterate, his mind
\nis apt to be perturbed when he is facing a charge of murder.  Fairness,
\ntherefore, requires that each material circumstance should be put simply and
\nseparately in a way that an illiterate mind, or one which is perturbed or
\nconfused, can readily appreciate and understand”.
\nOn a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the
\nrequirements of law, it is difficult to affirm the finding of conviction arrived
\nat by the lower Court and accordingly the same is set aside.\n<\/p>\n
\t10. In the result, the Criminal Appeals are allowed by setting aside
\nJudgment of the trial Court.  The bail bonds, if any, executed by the
\nappellants\/accused, shall stand cancelled and the fine amount, if any, paid by
\nthem, is ordered to be refunded forthwith.\n<\/p>\n
smn\t\t\t<\/p>\n
To\t<\/p>\n
1.The Special Judge cum Additional Sessions Judge cum
\n  Chief Judicial Magistrate,
\n  Pudukottai.\n<\/p>\n
2.The The Inspector of Police,
\n  Vigilance and Anti Corruption,
\n  Pudukottai.\n<\/p>\n
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
\n  Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
\n  Madurai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court V.A.Chelliah vs State on 14 October, 2009 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14\/10\/2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.SELVAM Crl.A.(MD)No.142 of 2000 and Crl.A.(MD)No. 143 of 2000 1.V.A.Chelliah .. Appellant in Crl.A.No.142 of 2000\/A1 2.Chinnakkannu .. Appellant in Crl.A.No.143 of 2000\/A2 Vs State, rep. by the Inspector of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-80104","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nV.A.Chelliah vs State on 14 October, 2009 - 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\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"V.A.Chelliah vs State on 14 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-07-08T01:59:36+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=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"V.A.Chelliah vs State on 14 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-07-08T01:59:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":2100,\"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\\\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009\",\"name\":\"V.A.Chelliah vs State on 14 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-07-08T01:59:36+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"V.A.Chelliah vs State on 14 October, 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":"V.A.Chelliah vs State on 14 October, 2009 - 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\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"V.A.Chelliah vs State on 14 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-07-08T01:59:36+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":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"V.A.Chelliah vs State on 14 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-07-08T01:59:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009"},"wordCount":2100,"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\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009","name":"V.A.Chelliah vs State on 14 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-07-08T01:59:36+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/v-a-chelliah-vs-state-on-14-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"V.A.Chelliah vs State on 14 October, 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\/80104","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=80104"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/80104\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=80104"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=80104"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=80104"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}