{"id":93467,"date":"2008-02-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-02-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008"},"modified":"2017-10-08T15:53:05","modified_gmt":"2017-10-08T10:23:05","slug":"sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008","title":{"rendered":"Sajeevan vs State on 18 February, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Sajeevan vs State on 18 February, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCrl.Rev.Pet.No. 1152 of 2001()\n\n\n\n1. SAJEEVAN\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n1. STATE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.I.ABDUL SALAM\n\n                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER\n\n Dated :18\/02\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                               A.K.BASHEER, J.\n              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n                       Crl.R.P.No.1152 OF 2001 &\n                            Crl.R.C.No.9 OF 2002\n              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -\n              Dated this the 18th day of February 2008\n\n                                       ORDER\n<\/pre>\n
     These two cases are being disposed of by this common<\/p>\n
judgment, since they arise from the same proceeding.<\/p>\n
     2. The revision petition is preferred by the accused, five in<\/p>\n
number, who have been concurrently found guilty, by the trial<\/p>\n
court as well as the appellate court, under Section 27(1)(e)(iv)<\/p>\n
of the Kerala Forest Act. Crl.R.C. has been registered suo-motu<\/p>\n
by this court to consider the legality and propriety of the order<\/p>\n
of the Sessions Court in appeal acquitting the accused under<\/p>\n
Section 27(1)(e) (iii) of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
     3. The prosecution case in brief was that on August 23,<\/p>\n
1993, the accused (six in number) had trespassed into<\/p>\n
Machiyani area of Thodupuzha Reserve Forest and attempted to<\/p>\n
cut and remove two teak trees standing in the forest land. The<\/p>\n
specific allegation was that the accused were found to have cut<\/p>\n
down one teak tree and top portion of another. The cut logs<\/p>\n
and branches and the tools and other paraphernalia used for<\/p>\n
this purpose, were seized under a mahazar. The accused were<\/p>\n
Crl.R.P.No.1152 OF 2001 &
\nCrl.R.C.No.9 OF 2002
\n                                2<\/span><\/p>\n
not either taken into custody or arrested, since on questioning<\/p>\n
them they had allegedly given their “correct identity”. They<\/p>\n
were however sent out of the forest area.\n<\/p>\n
      4. The prosecution examined PWs 1 and 2 and marked<\/p>\n
Exts.P1 to P3 and M.O.1 to M.O.3. PW1 who was working as<\/p>\n
the Forest Guard in that range during the relevant period,<\/p>\n
deposed before the court that he had seen two of the accused<\/p>\n
sawing the fallen tree while the other two were chopping off the<\/p>\n
branches. Two others were seen cutting the branches with a<\/p>\n
saw. The accused had trespassed into the reserve forest area<\/p>\n
and had indulged in the above illegal act. On questioning them,<\/p>\n
they gave their identity with address,    He further stated that<\/p>\n
Ext.P1, mahazar was prepared at the spot. The value of the<\/p>\n
timber logs was assessed at Rs.4,500\/- and the total loss<\/p>\n
sustained by the State was estimated to be Rs.6,500\/-. He also<\/p>\n
stated that the area from where the accused had cut the trees<\/p>\n
came under Ext.P2 notification. Form-I report was prepared by<\/p>\n
him which was marked as Ext.P3. He also identified M.Os.1 to<\/p>\n
Crl.R.P.No.1152 OF 2001 &
\nCrl.R.C.No.9 OF 2002
\n                                 3<\/span><\/p>\n
3. In cross examination, this witness admitted that there was<\/p>\n
no reason for not arresting the accused.         He believed the<\/p>\n
identity and address as stated by the accused. Significantly,<\/p>\n
this witness admitted that he had no prior acquaintance with<\/p>\n
any of the accused nor had he seen them before. He was seeing<\/p>\n
them for the first time on that date. He further admitted that<\/p>\n
he did not know what happened to Form-I notice, after he had<\/p>\n
entrusted it to the Range Officer.\n<\/p>\n
      5. PW2 was the Forester working in that range at the<\/p>\n
relevant point of time. He stated that he had visited the scene<\/p>\n
of occurrence and verified Ext.P1, mahazar and found the<\/p>\n
contents thereof to be correct.        In cross examination, this<\/p>\n
witness stated that there would have been a corresponding<\/p>\n
entry with regard to the incident in the ‘Beat’ diary. He further<\/p>\n
stated that the diary would be available in the Range office.<\/p>\n
      6. Reference has been made to the depositions of the two<\/p>\n
witnesses who were examined on the side of the prosecution in<\/p>\n
detail, only to indicate that there is some force in the contention<\/p>\n
Crl.R.P.No.1152 OF 2001 &
\nCrl.R.C.No.9 OF 2002
\n                                 4<\/span><\/p>\n
raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners that there was<\/p>\n
absolutely no corroborative evidence to incriminate the<\/p>\n
petitioners in the alleged offences. As rightly pointed out by the<\/p>\n
learned counsel only PW1 was examined as occurrence witness.<\/p>\n
PW1 stated that he had gone along with other beat guards for<\/p>\n
duty on that day. No one else was examined. More importantly<\/p>\n
Ext.P1 was admittedly prepared by one Mohammed Basheer,<\/p>\n
who was stated to be the beat staff watcher. He had signed in<\/p>\n
Ext.P1, Mahazar. But curiously, he was not examined on the<\/p>\n
side of the prosecution.       He would have been the most<\/p>\n
competent witness to speak about the alleged incident.<\/p>\n
      7. In this context, it may be noticed that the accused had a<\/p>\n
specific case that they were implicated in the case later without<\/p>\n
any basis and that they were totally innocent.          It is also<\/p>\n
pertinent to note that the alleged incident had taken place on<\/p>\n
August 23 1993. The complaint is seen prepared on August 24,<\/p>\n
1994.    But the complaint was filed before the court only in<\/p>\n
November, 1995. There is absolutely no explanation for more<\/p>\n
Crl.R.P.No.1152 OF 2001 &
\nCrl.R.C.No.9 OF 2002
\n                                5<\/span><\/p>\n
than two years’ delay in filing the complaint. There is also<\/p>\n
nothing on record as to what transpired in between and also<\/p>\n
whether the accused had been questioned by any officer at any<\/p>\n
point of time or their identity had been ascertained or verified.<\/p>\n
The unexplained delay in filing the complaint, in my view, casts<\/p>\n
a shadow of doubt on the entire prosecution case especially<\/p>\n
since the version given by PW1 that he had let off the accused<\/p>\n
without taking them into custody or arresting them is hard to<\/p>\n
believe. According to this witness, he had believed the identity<\/p>\n
of the accused as disclosed by them when they were found<\/p>\n
inside the forest. Under normal circumstances, the accused<\/p>\n
ought to have been taken into custody with the contraband if<\/p>\n
they were found indulging in such an illegal activity.<\/p>\n
      8. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of<\/p>\n
the case, I am satisfied that the petitioners are entitled to get<\/p>\n
the benefit of doubt. Therefore, the order of conviction and<\/p>\n
sentence passed against the petitioners is set aside and they are<\/p>\n
acquitted. Crl.R.P. is allowed. In view of the order passed in<\/p>\n
Crl.R.P.No.1152 OF 2001 &
\nCrl.R.C.No.9 OF 2002
\n                                 6<\/span><\/p>\n
Criminal Revision Petition, no orders are warranted in Crl.R.C.<\/p>\n
Therefore, Crl.R.C. is closed.\n<\/p>\n
      In the result, Crl.R.P. is allowed and the petitioners are<\/p>\n
acquitted. Crl.R.C. is closed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                         (A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE)
\njes<\/p>\n
Crl.R.P.No.1152 OF 2001 &
\nCrl.R.C.No.9 OF 2002
\n                            7<\/span><\/p>\n
                                        A.K.BASHEER, J.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                             – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –\n<\/p>\n
                               Crl.R.P.No.1152 OF 2001 &
\n                                    Crl.R.C.No.9 OF 2002\n<\/p>\n
                             – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                                ORDER<\/p>\n
                                     Dated 18th Feb. 2008<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Sajeevan vs State on 18 February, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 1152 of 2001() 1. SAJEEVAN … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE … Respondent For Petitioner :SRI.T.I.ABDUL SALAM For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Hon’ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER Dated :18\/02\/2008 O R D E R A.K.BASHEER, J. – – […]<\/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-93467","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSajeevan vs State on 18 February, 2008 - 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\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sajeevan vs State on 18 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-02-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-10-08T10:23:05+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\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sajeevan vs State on 18 February, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-02-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-08T10:23:05+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1117,\"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\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008\",\"name\":\"Sajeevan vs State on 18 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-02-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-08T10:23:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sajeevan vs State on 18 February, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sajeevan vs State on 18 February, 2008 - 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\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sajeevan vs State on 18 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-02-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-10-08T10:23:05+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\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sajeevan vs State on 18 February, 2008","datePublished":"2008-02-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-08T10:23:05+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008"},"wordCount":1117,"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\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008","name":"Sajeevan vs State on 18 February, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-02-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-08T10:23:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sajeevan-vs-state-on-18-february-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sajeevan vs State on 18 February, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93467","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=93467"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93467\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=93467"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=93467"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=93467"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}