{"id":86685,"date":"2009-02-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-02-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2"},"modified":"2015-03-03T02:53:13","modified_gmt":"2015-03-02T21:23:13","slug":"vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2","title":{"rendered":"Vinod Metha vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Vinod Metha vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCrl.MC.No. 578 of 2006()\n\n\n1. VINOD METHA,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,\n\n3. J.S.PREM,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.P.MOHAMMED NIYAZ\n\n                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR\n\nThe Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI\n\n Dated :24\/02\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                        M.C.HARI RANI, J.\n        -----------------------------------------------------\n                 CRL.M.C.No.578 OF 2006\n      -----------------------------------------------------\n      DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY , 2009\n\n                             O R D E R\n<\/pre>\n
      This petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. on<\/p>\n
24.2.2006 with the prayer originally to quash Annexure A1 FIR<\/p>\n
and all further proceedings initiated against the petitioner in<\/p>\n
Crime No.580\/05 of Kottayam West Police Station. Subsequently,<\/p>\n
this petition has been amended as per order dated 28.9.2006 in<\/p>\n
Crl.M.A.No.4479\/06 by amending the prayer to quash Annexure<\/p>\n
A3 charge sheet and all further proceedings in C.C.No.302\/06<\/p>\n
pending on the file of the Court of Judicial First Class Magistrate-<\/p>\n
III, Kottayam.\n<\/p>\n
      2.    The facts of the case stated in this petition are as<\/p>\n
follows:\n<\/p>\n
C.C.No.302\/06 is filed against the petitioner herein on the basis<\/p>\n
of the complaint made by the de facto complainant, the 3rd<\/p>\n
respondent alleging offence under Section 420 of IPC. Copy of<\/p>\n
the FIR in Crime No.580\/05 registered on 22.12.2005 before the<\/p>\n
Kottayam West Police Station along with the first information<\/p>\n
CRL.M.C.No.578\/06               -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
statement of the de facto complainant is produced as Annexure A1.<\/p>\n
The case was investigated and final report filed before the Court of<\/p>\n
J.F.C.M.-III, Kottayam on 9.6.2006 which was taken on file by the<\/p>\n
learned Magistrate as C.C.No.302\/06 on 15.6.2006 as revealed from<\/p>\n
the stamp affixed in Annexure A3. The allegation made against the<\/p>\n
petitioner in the FIR and in the final report is that the<\/p>\n
petitioner\/accused with intend to deceive the de facto complainant, the<\/p>\n
3rd respondent, who is an agent of Visco Company approached him and<\/p>\n
the de facto complainant was compelled to supply on the<\/p>\n
representation made by the accused surgical instruments to Deen<\/p>\n
Hospital at Punalur, worth Rs.3,76,598\/-.          The accused paid<\/p>\n
Rs.2,33,385\/- as per demand draft and thereafter committed default of<\/p>\n
payment of the balance amount of Rs.1,43,213\/- and thereby cheated<\/p>\n
the de facto complainant and committed offence under Section 420 of<\/p>\n
IPC.\n<\/p>\n
      3.   The statement of facts of the case in C.C.No.302\/06 as<\/p>\n
mentioned in this petition filed by the petitioner\/accused before this<\/p>\n
Court is disputed by the 3rd respondent herein\/the complainant and<\/p>\n
filed a detailed counter affidavit before this Court.   The allegations<\/p>\n
made in the petition are denied by the 3rd respondent. It is specifically<\/p>\n
CRL.M.C.No.578\/06                -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
contended by the 3rd respondent in the counter affidavit that 3rd<\/p>\n
respondent as the Manager of M\/s Anamallais Surgical Co. of India<\/p>\n
engaged in the business of dealers in surgical instruments.        The<\/p>\n
petitioner approached the 3rd respondent for supply of 26 numbers of<\/p>\n
fowlers hospital cots and 1 number of height adjustable stretcher.<\/p>\n
The written order was placed by the petitioner on 16.8.04 and an<\/p>\n
amount of Rs.50,000\/- was paid on that date as advance. Annexure<\/p>\n
R3(a) is produced to substantiate the same. The proforma invoice<\/p>\n
issued to the petitioner on 16.8.04 is also produced as Annexure R3<\/p>\n
(b). The 3rd respondent, as per the order placed by the petitioner in<\/p>\n
turn placed the order for supply of the goods to the manufacturer Steel<\/p>\n
Hospital Furniture, Umergom,Gujarat, as per invoices dated 25.1.2005<\/p>\n
in favour of M\/s Anamallais Surgical Co.of India for Rs.2,49,288\/- and<\/p>\n
Rs,67,600\/-, copies of which are produced as Annexures R3(c) and R3<\/p>\n
(d). The goods sent by the manufacturer to be delivered at Punalur<\/p>\n
was received by the petitioner herein directly with the intention of<\/p>\n
cheating and defrauding the 3rd respondent and collected the goods by<\/p>\n
re-directing the truck along with the goods to Deen Hospital, Punalur.<\/p>\n
On coming to know of this fact and also the receipt of Rs.5,24,000\/-<\/p>\n
directly by the petitioner from the Deen Hospital, Punalur, the 3rd<\/p>\n
CRL.M.C.No.578\/06               -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
respondent preferred a complaint against the petitioner for the offence<\/p>\n
under Section 420 of IPC. The 3rd respondent has also produced letter<\/p>\n
of demand made by the 3rd respondent to the petitioner herein sent on<\/p>\n
18.10.2005 demanding the balance payment of Rs.1,26,598.35<\/p>\n
produced as Annexure R3(f), to which reply has been sent by the<\/p>\n
petitioner on 10.11.2005, produced as Annexure R3(g). It was only<\/p>\n
subsequently, the complaint was preferred by the de facto complainant<\/p>\n
alleging offence under Section 420 of IPC. It was also contended that<\/p>\n
there is no merit in the petition, which is liable to be dismissed with<\/p>\n
costs.\n<\/p>\n
      4.   Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and<\/p>\n
the 3rd respondent. Heard the learned Public Prosecutor also.<\/p>\n
      5.   It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the<\/p>\n
petitioner that there was business transaction between the petitioner<\/p>\n
and the 3rd respondent-defacto complainant.         The fact that the<\/p>\n
petitioner placed orders for purchase of surgical instruments from the<\/p>\n
manufacturer through the 3rd respondent as per invoice dated 8.2.05 is<\/p>\n
also admitted. But, according to the learned counsel appearing for the<\/p>\n
petitioner, there was no intention of cheating and no fraud has been<\/p>\n
committed by the petitioner while placing the order to purchase the<\/p>\n
CRL.M.C.No.578\/06                 -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
surgical instruments from the 3rd respondent as alleged in the<\/p>\n
complaint. According to the learned counsel, an amount of<\/p>\n
Rs.2,33,385.35\/- has been paid by the petitioner to the 3rd respondent<\/p>\n
in advance and if there is any dispute with regard to the balance<\/p>\n
amount, it is only a civil dispute and no sufficient ingredients are there<\/p>\n
to attract the offence under section 420 of IPC. There was no breach<\/p>\n
of contract between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent as alleged in<\/p>\n
the complaint. Therefore, continuance of the proceedings against the<\/p>\n
petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 420 of IPC is an<\/p>\n
abuse of process of court and is liable to be quashed in the interest of<\/p>\n
justice, it is submitted.\n<\/p>\n
      6.     All these submissions made by the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
petitioner has been disputed by the learned counsel for the 3rd<\/p>\n
respondent. According to the learned counsel, sufficient ingredients for<\/p>\n
the offence under Section 420 IPC are there in the first information<\/p>\n
statement given by the complainant as revealed from the FIR and the<\/p>\n
copy of the FI statement produced as Annexure A1 along with this<\/p>\n
petition.       Admittedly, there was business transaction between the<\/p>\n
petitioner and the 3rd respondent. The cheating, misrepresentation,<\/p>\n
etc. by the petitioner as contended by the 3rd respondent will be<\/p>\n
CRL.M.C.No.578\/06                -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
decided by the learned Magistrate after considering the evidence to be<\/p>\n
adduced on the side of the prosecution. This Court cannot come to a<\/p>\n
conclusion on those aspects.        Whether fraudulent and dishonest<\/p>\n
intention was there to the accused from the very beginning of the<\/p>\n
transaction while placing the orders before the 3rd respondent for the<\/p>\n
supply of surgical instruments in favour of M\/s Anamallais Surgical Co.<\/p>\n
of India to be delivered to Deen Hospital, Punalur and whether he can<\/p>\n
be convicted for that offence, etc. will also depend upon the evidence<\/p>\n
to be adduced on the side of the prosecution. The learned Magistrate<\/p>\n
has taken cognizance of the case on the satisfaction that prima facie<\/p>\n
case is made out against the petitioner and taken the case on file as<\/p>\n
C.C.No.302\/06, which is pending before the Court of J.F.C.M.-III,<\/p>\n
Kottayam as revealed from Annexure A3. There is no grievance to the<\/p>\n
petitioner in this petition that no enquiry as contemplated under the<\/p>\n
Cr.P.C. has been conducted by the learned Magistrate while taking<\/p>\n
cognizance of that case. It is true that there is a finding of the learned<\/p>\n
Sessions Judge, Kottayam in Crl.M.P.No.333\/06, the bail application<\/p>\n
filed by the petitioner, copy of which is produced as Annexure A2 that<\/p>\n
“the crucial question to be considered is whether the materials on<\/p>\n
record are sufficient to hold that there are reasonable grounds to<\/p>\n
CRL.M.C.No.578\/06                  -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
believe that the accused is answerable for an offence of cheating. On<\/p>\n
the basis of the materials at present it can be clearly found that this is<\/p>\n
a case of civil nature only”.     That is only a finding of the learned<\/p>\n
Sessions Judge in the bail application filed by the petitioner herein and<\/p>\n
to consider whether bail can be granted to the petitioner and whether<\/p>\n
he can be released under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. which has no baring<\/p>\n
with the evidence and the disputed facts in the present case.<\/p>\n
Considering these aspects and on the basis of the documents produced<\/p>\n
by the petitioner and also by the 3rd respondent in this case, I find that<\/p>\n
sufficient ingredients are there to proceed against the petitioner which<\/p>\n
was already done by the learned Magistrate. Therefore, there is no<\/p>\n
ground in this petition to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Court<\/p>\n
as envisaged under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and this petition is liable to<\/p>\n
be dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
      In the result, the Crl.M.C. is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                        M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
dsn<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Vinod Metha vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Crl.MC.No. 578 of 2006() 1. VINOD METHA, … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA, … Respondent 2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, 3. J.S.PREM, For Petitioner :SRI.V.P.MOHAMMED NIYAZ For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Hon’ble MRS. […]<\/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":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-86685","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nVinod Metha vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 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\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vinod Metha vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2\" \/>\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=\"2009-02-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-03-02T21:23:13+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Vinod Metha vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-02T21:23:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2\"},\"wordCount\":1472,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2\",\"name\":\"Vinod Metha vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-02T21:23:13+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vinod Metha vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 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":"Vinod Metha vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 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\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vinod Metha vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-02-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-03-02T21:23:13+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Vinod Metha vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 2009","datePublished":"2009-02-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-02T21:23:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2"},"wordCount":1472,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2","name":"Vinod Metha vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-02-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-02T21:23:13+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-metha-vs-state-of-kerala-on-24-february-2009-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vinod Metha vs State Of Kerala on 24 February, 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\/86685","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=86685"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86685\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=86685"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=86685"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=86685"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}