{"id":88192,"date":"2010-01-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-01-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2"},"modified":"2018-01-24T16:44:08","modified_gmt":"2018-01-24T11:14:08","slug":"shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2","title":{"rendered":"Shripatsinh vs State on 18 January, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n
Shripatsinh vs State on 18 January, 2010<\/div>\n
Author: Ravi R.Tripathi,&Nbsp;<\/div>\n
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCR.A\/690\/2005\t 10\/ 10\tJUDGMENT \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 690 of 2005\n \n\n \nFor\nApproval and Signature:  \n \n\n\n \n\nHONOURABLE\nMR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI\n \n=========================================================\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n1\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tReporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n2\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nTo be\n\t\t\treferred to the Reporter or not ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n3\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\ttheir Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n4\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tthis case involves a substantial question of law as to the\n\t\t\tinterpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order\n\t\t\tmade thereunder ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\n5\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nWhether\n\t\t\tit is to be circulated to the civil judge ?\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\n=========================================================\n\n \n\nSHRIPATSINH\nKESHRISINH RANAWAT - Applicant(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nSTATE\nOF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=========================================================\n \nAppearance\n: \nMR\nNV GANDHI for\nApplicant(s) : 1, \nMR DC SEJPAL, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for\nRespondent(s) : 1, \nRULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 2, \nMR\nSHAKEEL A QURESHI for Respondent(s) : 2, \nMR DEVENDRA K RATHOD for\nRespondent(s) :\n2, \n=========================================================\n\n\n \n\t  \n\t \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 18\/01\/2010 \n\n \n\nORAL\nJUDGMENT<\/pre>\n
The
\n\tpetitioner is before this Court being aggrieved by filing of
\n\tcriminal proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal
\n\tProcedure being Criminal Misc.Application No.85 of 2002 in the Court
\n\tof learned JMFC, Rajpipla by respondent No.2 and also by judgment
\n\tand order passed therein, which was the subject matter of Criminal
\n\tRevision Application No.202 of 2004 before the learned Joint
\n\tDistrict Judge & Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch camp
\n\tRajpipla, which was decided by judgment and order dated 7.4.2005.
\n\tThe prayers made in the present petition read as under:-\n<\/p>\n
 A.\tYour
\n\tLordships may be pleased to issue writ of certiorari or any other
\n\tappropriate writ in the nature of certiorari and be pleased to quash
\n\tand set aside the order dated 7th April, 2005 passed by
\n\tthe Ld.Joint District & Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch camp
\n\tat Rajpipla in Criminal Revision Application No.202 of 2004 and
\n\tfurther be pleased and set aside the order dated 18th
\n\tAugust 2004 passed by the Ld.J.M.F.C. at Rajpipla in Criminal
\n\tMisc.Application No.85 of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
B.\tYour
\n\tLordships may be pleased to issue writ of certiorari or any other
\n\tappropriate writ, order or direction and be pleased to quash and set
\n\taside the proceedings of Misc.Criminal Application No.85 of 2002
\n\tpending before the Ld.J.M.F.C. at Rajpipla, Dist.Narmada.\n<\/p>\n
C.\tPending
\n\thearing and final disposal of this petition, your lordships may be
\n\tpleased to stay the proceedings of Misc.Criminal Application No.85
\n\tof 2002 pending before the Ld.J.M.F.C., Rajpipla.\n<\/p>\n
D.\tPending
\n\thearing and final disposal of this petition, your lordships may be
\n\tpleased to stay the orders at Annexure-A & B to this petition.\n<\/p>\n
E.\tAny
\n\tother relief deemed just and proper may please be granted in the
\n\tinterest of justice.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tcase of the petitioner as set-out in paragraphs 1 and 2 reads as
\n\tunder, which is reproduced for the ready perusal:-\n<\/p>\n
1.\tBy
\n\tway of present petition, the petitioner challenges the legality and
\n\tvalidity of the order dated 7th April, 2005 passed by the
\n\tLd.Joint District & Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch camp
\n\tRajpipla in Criminal Revision Application No.202 of 2004. Annexed
\n\thereto collectively and marked as  Annexure-A
\n\tare the copies of memo of Revision Application and order passed
\n\ttherein. The Ld.Additional Sessions Judge by the impugned order
\n\trejected the said application filed by the petitioner, wherein the
\n\tpetitioner has challenged the validity and legality of the order
\n\tdated 18th
\n\tAugust, 2004 passed by Ld.J.M.F.C., Rajpipla in Criminal
\n\tMisc.Application No.85 of 2002 filed by the respondent No.2 U\/s.125
\n\tof the Code of Criminal Procedure. Annexed hereto collectively and
\n\tmarked as  Annexure-B
\n\tare the copies of application for preliminary issue and order dated
\n\t18th
\n\tAugust, 2004 passed by the J.M.F.C., Rajpipla in Criminal
\n\tMisc.Application No.85 of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
\t2.\tThe
\n\tfacts of the case are as under:-\n<\/p>\n
\tA.\tThe
\n\tmarriage of the petitioner and the respondent No.2 was solemnized on
\n\t02.05.1955 according to hindu rites at Rajpipla. Due to wedlock
\n\tbetween the petitioner and respondent no.2, the respondent no.2 gave
\n\tbirth to three children. Now all the children have become major and
\n\tthey have settled in their life.\n<\/p>\n
\tB.\tThe
\n\trespondent no.2 wife Ushakumari had filed Civil Suit No.4745 of 1978
\n\tin the City Civil Court at Ahmedabad as a pauper seeking inter-alia
\n\trelief\/s as under:\n<\/p>\n
\t(a)\tallow
\n\tthe plaintiffs applicants to file this suit as pauper and be pleased
\n\tto pass a decree directing to the defendant to pay Rs.1000.00 per
\n\tmonth as maintenance to the plaintiff no.1;\n<\/p>\n
\t(b)
\n\t\tRs.250.00 per month as maintenance to the plaintiff no.2;\n<\/p>\n
(c)\tDirecting
\n\tthe defendant to pay Rs.98,000.00 as
\n\tmaintenance from April, 1969 to May, 1977 for eight years and 2
\n\tmonths as the rate of Rs.1000.00 per month and Rs.250.00 as
\n\tmaintenance of plaintiff no.2 at the rate of Rs.250.00 per month
\n\twith running interest at 12 percent;\n<\/p>\n
\tC.\tThe
\n\tpetitioner submits that after hearing and recording evidence from
\n\tboth the sides Ld.City Civil Judge, Court No.16, Ahmedabad vide his
\n\tjudgment and order dated 20.08.1982 passed the following order.\n<\/p>\n
\t The
\n\tsuit is partly decreed with costs.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe
\n\tdefendant   husband, is hereby ordered to pay to the plaintiffs a
\n\tsum of Rs.1,10,376.00 ps. Towards the arrears which included past 3
\n\tyears, arrears up to the date of the filing of the suit, as well as
\n\tfrom the date of the suit till the date of decree. The plaintiffs
\n\tare entitled to charge interest at the rate of 6% from the defendant
\n\ton the sum of Rs.72,625.00 from the date of the filing of the suit
\n\ttill the passing of the decree.\n<\/p>\n
The
\n\tdefendant to pay to the plaintiffs a sum of Rs.1250.00 i.e.
\n\tRs.1000.00 to the plaintiff no.1 wife and Rs.250.00 to the plaintiff
\n\tno.2 child till she marriages, towards, the maintenance on 5th
\n\tof every month from the date of the passing of the decree.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe
\n\tplaintiffs were permitted to file the present suit in forma pauper
\n\tis, and therefore, the court fees on the claim made by the
\n\tplaintiffs should be recovered, and the Registrar, should send to
\n\tthe Government pleader, a memo of the court fees due and payable by
\n\tthe plaintiffs.\n<\/p>\n
D.\tBeing
\n\taggrieved by the said judgment and decree passed by the Ld.City
\n\tCivil Judge, Court No.16 at Ahmedabad in Civil Suit No.4745 of 1978,
\n\tthe petitioner had filed First Appeal No.78 of 1983 before the
\n\tHon’ble High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. The petitioner had also
\n\tfiled
\n\tCivil Application for stay of the impugned judgment and decree
\n\tpassed by the Ld.City Civil Judge in favour of the respondent no.2
\n\therein. The said appeal came up for hearing before the Division
\n\tBench of Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat. Due to efforts put up by the
\n\tHon’ble Court, relatives of the parties and advocates appearing  in
\n\tthe matter, the petitioner and respondent no.2 agreed to file
\n\tconsent terms before the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat. The
\n\tpetitioner and the respondent no.2 on 21.02.1983 had signed the
\n\tconsent terms before the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat and requested
\n\tto the Hon’ble High Court to record the same and pass the decree and
\n\tterms of said consent terms. Annexed hereto and marked as  Annexure-C
\n\tis
\n\tthe copy of said consent terms filed before the Division Bench of
\n\tthe Hon’ble High Court. As per the terms No.1 stated in the said
\n\tconsent terms the decree of the trial court was confirmed, but if
\n\tthe appellant paid a sum of Rs.1,50,000.00 to the respondents on or
\n\tbefore 31.08.1983 it shall be deemed to in full and final settlement
\n\tof their total claims in Civil Suit No.4745 of 1978. As per the term
\n\tstated at Clause No.III, the petitioner was required to deposit of
\n\tRs.15,000.00 towards the total sum of Rs.1,50,000.00 within one week
\n\tand the petitioner was required pay remaining amount of
\n\tRs.1,35,000.00 on or before 31.08.1983. The Division Bench
\n\tconsisting (Coram: Hon’ble Mr.Justice P.D.Desai & Hon’ble
\n\tMr.Justice R.C.Rathod, JJ.) vide their order dated 21.02.1983
\n\trecorded the consent terms and passed the order in accordance with
\n\tconsent terms. The Hon’ble Court was pleased to substitute the
\n\timpugned decree passed by the Trial Court in terms of the said
\n\torder. Annexed hereto and marked as  Annexure-D
\n\tis the copy of the order dated 21.02.1983 passed by this Hon’ble
\n\tCourt.\n<\/p>\n
\tE.\tAs
\n\tstated and submitted earlier that the petitioner had paid an amount
\n\tagainst the arrears of the maintenance and amount against the future
\n\tmaintenance to the respondent no.2 and settled the matter of
\n\tmaintenance of the respondent no.2 amicably by obtaining the order
\n\tin terms of consent terms.\n<\/p>\n
F.\tOne
\n\tfine morning in the year 2002 after almost 20 years after settlement
\n\tof dispute of maintenance amicably before the Division Bench of the
\n\tHon’ble High Court, the respondent no.2 Smt.Ushakumari filed an
\n\tapplication U\/s.125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being Criminal
\n\tMisc.Application No.85 of 2002 in the Court of Ld.J.M.F.C., Rajpipla
\n\tsuppressing the facts of amicable settlement of the dispute of
\n\tmaintenance prayed for maintenance of Rs.30,000.00 from the
\n\tpetitioner. Annexed hereto and marked as  Annexure-E
\n\tis a copy of the memo said Criminal Misc.Application No.85 of 2002.\n<\/p>\n
G.\tUpon
\n\tservice the process of the said Criminal Misc.Application, the
\n\tpetitioner appeared with his advocate and raised preliminary
\n\tobjection against the maintainability of the said Criminal
\n\tMisc.Application filed U\/s.125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
\n\tseeking maintenance at Rs.30,000.00 p.m. from the petitioner. The
\n\tLd.J.M.F.C. without considering the earlier proceedings taken place
\n\tbetween parties before the Hon’ble Ahmedabad City Civil Court and
\n\tHon’ble High Court of Gujarat rejected the application vide his
\n\torder dated 18th
\n\tAugust, 2004 mainly on the grounds that, (1) after consent decree
\n\tdated 21.02.1983 there is a change in the status of the parties and
\n\tthe said consent decree was lesser than the present status and
\n\tincome of the parties, (2) the Hon’ble Court has power to entertain
\n\tapplication U\/s.125 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure filed by
\n\tthe wife after consent decree as this is the first application
\n\tu\/s.125 of the Cr.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
H.\tBeing
\n\tseriously aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned order dated
\n\t18th
\n\tAugust, 2004 passed by the Ld.J.M.F.C., Rajpipla in Criminal
\n\tMisc.Application No.85 of 2002, the petitioner had preferred
\n\tCriminal Revision Application No.202 of 2004 in the Court of
\n\tSessions Judge at Bharuch on the grounds and submissions mentioned
\n\tin the memo of revision application. The Ld.Additional Sessions
\n\tJudge, Bharuch camp Rajpipla
\n\tvide his order dated 7th
\n\tApril, 2005 rejected the said application on the ground that there
\n\tis no bar to file application u\/s.125 of the Code of Criminal
\n\tProcedure after full and final settlement in the civil proceedings,
\n\thence this Special Criminal Application.\n<\/p>\n
\tIt
\n\tis thereafter that respondent No.2 filed the aforesaid proceedings
\n\tu\/s.125 of the Criminal Procedure Code.\n<\/p>\n
\tHeard
\n\tlearned advocate Mr.N.V.Gandhi for the petitioner and learned
\n\tadvocate Mr.Shakeel Qureshi for respondent No.2. Learned A.P.P.,
\n\tMr.Sejpal, assisted the Court appearing for respondent No.1.\n<\/p>\n
From
\n\tthe perusal of the facts of the case, it is not in dispute that the
\n\tcivil suit filed by the respondent No.2 being Civil Suit No.4745 of
\n\t1978 which gave rise to First Appeal No.78 of 1983 was settled
\n\tbetween the parties and at relevant point of time, it was agreed
\n\tthat a total amount of Rs.1,50,000.00 will be paid to respondents,
\n\tand out of the said amount, Rs.1,20,000.00 will be towards right of
\n\tthe wife and Rs.30,000.00 will be payable to the minor girl. That
\n\tbeing so, to file proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. is
\n\tuncalled for. The petitioner is aged about 71 years and respondent
\n\tNo.2 is aged about 68 years. This Court (Coram: K.S.Jhaveri, J.)
\n\tpassed order on 21.03.2007 as under;\n<\/p>\n
\t 1.
\nHeard. As a result of perusal of records, it is\tborne out that the
\nissue between the parties was\tsettled by way of consent terms and by
\nway of decree \tin
\nFirst Appeal No. 78 of 1983 before this Court\twhereby the decree of
\nthe trial court was confirmed\tbut if the appellant paid a sum of Rs.
\n1,50,000\/- to \tthe respondents on or before 31.08.1983 the
\nsaid\tpayment was to be considered full and final\tsettlement of their
\ntotal claims in Civil Suit No.\t4745 of 1976 in the City Civil Court,
\nAhmedabad.\n<\/p>\n
\t2.
\nHowever, the argument advanced by Mr Shakeel\tQureshi, learned
\nadvocate appearing for respondent\tno.2 is that in view of the changed
\ncircumstances,\tan application by the respondent no.2 under
\nsection\t125 of the Criminal Procedure Code is maintainable.\n<\/p>\n
\t3.
\nPrima facie, in view of the fact that the matter\tis settled between
\nthe parties by way of consent\tterms in First Appeal decree, this
\ncontention shall\tnot sustain. However if the applicant is ready
\nto\treturn the corresponding rupee value, as on today,\tof the amount
\nof Rs. 1,20,000\/- paid to the\trespondent no.2 by the applicant in
\n1983, this Court \tis of the view that the application can
\nbe\tconsidered on merits.\n<\/p>\n
\t4.
\nIn that view of the matter, with a view to enable \tMr Qureshi to take
\ninstructions matter is adjourned\tto 29.03.07.\n<\/p>\n
Learned
\n\tadvocate Mr.Qureshi for respondent No.2 has not spelt out as to what
\n\twill be the value of Rs.1,20,000.00 which was paid to respondent
\n\tNo.2 in the year 1983 while settling the matter and as to whether
\n\trespondent No.2 is in a position, with willingness, to return that
\n\tamount to the petitioner herein, so that she is able to claim
\n\tmaintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
This
\n\tCourt is of the opinion that the decisions which are relied upon by
\n\trespondent No.2, which are produced by the learned advocate for
\n\trespondent No.2 herein along with the reply dated 30.3.2009, has no
\n\tapplication to the  facts of the present case. If such a stand is
\n\tallowed to be taken by any party, it will render all matters which
\n\tstood finalised on entering a compromise and that will give rise to
\n\tan atmosphere of uncertainty which will not be  good for the people
\n\tand the Society. Generally when any matter is compromised, parties
\n\tdo take that the matter has come to an end and it is finally
\n\tconcluded. It is very easy to say that  Section 125 of Cr.P.C.
\n\toperates in a different field, than the field which is covered by
\n\tcivil matter. But in fact, what was compromised by settled by
\n\trespondent No.2 in civil matter was her right of maintenance. That
\n\tbeing so, once that matter is settled, the right of respondent No.2
\n\tto get maintenance u\/s.125 of the Cr.P.C. does not survive because
\n\tinterse relationship between the parties comes to an end. Respondent
\n\tNo.2 cannot have best of both the worlds. She cannot after having
\n\tsettled the matter in Civil Court as a full and final settlement of
\n\ther right of can file proceedings under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
7.1\tThe
\n\tcomplexion of the matter would have been different, if respondent
\n\tNo.2 had obtained an order of grant of maintenance in the civil
\n\tCourt and the matter was not settled, as a ‘full and final
\n\tsettlement’, then possibly it would have been possible for
\n\trespondent No.2 to invoke Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.. The Court
\n\twould have examined this question if the facts would have been so.
\n\tThe Court is of the opinion that when the parties have settled their
\n\tinterse rights in a Civil Court, one cannot have recourse under
\n\tSection 125 of the Cr.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
Besides
\n\tthe civil matter was settled in the year 1983 and it is only after
\n\tlong nine years that the proceedings under Section 125 of the
\n\tCr.P.C. is filed, in 2002. This itself speaks about the intention of
\n\trespondent No.2 which cannot be said to be bonafide by any
\n\tstandards.\n<\/p>\n
In
\n\tview of the aforesaid observations, this petition is allowed. The
\n\tjudgment and order passed by the learned JMFC, Rajpipla in Criminal
\n\tMisc.Application No.85 of 2002 and confirmed by learned Joint
\n\tDistrict & Sessions Judge, Bharuch camp Rajpipla in Criminal
\n\tRevision Application No.202 of 2004 are hereby quashed and
\n\tset-aside.\n<\/p>\n
9.1\tTaking
\n\tinto consideration the aforesaid discussions and the position of
\n\tlaw, relief as prayed for in Clause-B is also granted and the
\n\tproceedings of Criminal Misc.Application No.85 of 2002 are quashed
\n\tand set-aside. Rule is made absolute with no order as to cost.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t(Ravi
\nR.Tripathi, J.)<\/p>\n
(binoy)<\/p>\n
\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Gujarat High Court Shripatsinh vs State on 18 January, 2010 Author: Ravi R.Tripathi,&Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCR.A\/690\/2005 10\/ 10 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 690 of 2005 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may […]<\/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":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-88192","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nShripatsinh vs State on 18 January, 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\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shripatsinh vs State on 18 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2\" \/>\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=\"2010-01-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-24T11:14:08+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=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shripatsinh vs State on 18 January, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-24T11:14:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2\"},\"wordCount\":2582,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2\",\"name\":\"Shripatsinh vs State on 18 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-01-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-24T11:14:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shripatsinh vs State on 18 January, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Shripatsinh vs State on 18 January, 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\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shripatsinh vs State on 18 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-01-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-24T11:14:08+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":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shripatsinh vs State on 18 January, 2010","datePublished":"2010-01-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-24T11:14:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2"},"wordCount":2582,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2","name":"Shripatsinh vs State on 18 January, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-01-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-24T11:14:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shripatsinh-vs-state-on-18-january-2010-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shripatsinh vs State on 18 January, 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:\/\/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\/88192","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=88192"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/88192\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=88192"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=88192"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=88192"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}