{"id":98205,"date":"2008-06-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-06-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008"},"modified":"2014-12-03T03:18:17","modified_gmt":"2014-12-02T21:48:17","slug":"thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008","title":{"rendered":"Thankappan vs State Of Kerala on 19 June, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
Thankappan vs State Of Kerala on 19 June, 2008<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nCRL.A.No. 1588 of 2007()\n\n\n1. THANKAPPAN, S\/O.PAL PILLAI,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n                For Petitioner  :LIJU MP[STATE BRIEF]\n\n                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN\n\n Dated :19\/06\/2008\n\n O R D E R\n                      V.K.MOHANAN, J.\n          ----------------------------------------------\n                   CRL.A. No.1588 OF 2007\n          ----------------------------------------------\n                   Dated, 19th June, 2008.\n\n                          JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
     This jail appeal is preferred by the accused in Sessions<\/p>\n
Case No.392 of 2001 challenging the conviction and sentence<\/p>\n
passed by the court of the Addl. Sessions Judge for the      trial<\/p>\n
of Abkari cases, Neyyattinkara by its judgment dated<\/p>\n
30.4.2007 by which the appellant is convicted under Section<\/p>\n
58 of the Abkari Act and sentenced to         undergo    rigorous<\/p>\n
imprisonment for a period of 3 years and to pay a fine of<\/p>\n
Rs.1,00,000\/-(one lakh only), and in default of payment of<\/p>\n
fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 6<\/p>\n
months.\n<\/p>\n
      2. This appeal is prosecuted by Adv. Sri Liju M.P.,<\/p>\n
appointed as State Brief.\n<\/p>\n
      3. The prosecution case is that the Excise Inspector of<\/p>\n
Amaravila Excise Range office, on 13-4-1999, at about 11.30<\/p>\n
a.m. while    conducting   patrol duty, found the accused at<\/p>\n
Amaravila-Kattiluvita road,    in front of     Government Tiles<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1588\/2007
\n                               -:2:-<\/span><\/p>\n
Factory at Keezhkolla Desom, Chenkal Village , in possession<\/p>\n
of a 5 litre black jerrycan which on examination was found<\/p>\n
to contain    3 litres of arrack in it, which     the accused<\/p>\n
possessed in contravention of the provisions of the Abkari<\/p>\n
Act and thereby committed the offence punishable under<\/p>\n
section 58 of the Abkari Act. After effecting seizure of thondi<\/p>\n
article and complying with the legal formalities, the accused<\/p>\n
was arrested and a case was registered. After the arrest of<\/p>\n
the accused, the crime and occurrence report was lodged<\/p>\n
before   the    Judicial  Magistrate   of   the  Ist  Class-II,<\/p>\n
Neyyattinkara.    After completing    the investigation,  Final<\/p>\n
Report was laid by another Excise Inspector of Amaravila<\/p>\n
Excise Range, upon which the court took cognizance and the<\/p>\n
case    was       committed       to   the   Sessions    Court,<\/p>\n
Thiruvananthapuram, which in turn          made over to the<\/p>\n
Assistant Sessions Court, Neyyattinkara and later on, the case<\/p>\n
was made over to the Addl.Sessions Court for the trial of the<\/p>\n
Abkari Act cases, Neyyattinkara.\n<\/p>\n
      4. In the trial court, the accused was produced from<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1588\/2007
\n                                -:3:-<\/span><\/p>\n
jail and he was represented by       a Lawyer appointed by the<\/p>\n
Taluk Legal Service Committee, Neyyattinkara and framed a<\/p>\n
charge against the accused under section 58 of the Abkari<\/p>\n
Act which was read over and explained to him, but he denied<\/p>\n
the charge which resulted      in further    trial of the case.<\/p>\n
Accordingly, PWs 1 to 5 were examined on the side of the<\/p>\n
prosecution and Exts.P1 to P10 were marked and M.O-1 was<\/p>\n
marked as material object. No evidence was adduced from<\/p>\n
the side of the defence.\n<\/p>\n
      5.  During the course of trial, four issues were framed<\/p>\n
by the court below and finally, the trial court found that the<\/p>\n
accused is guilty of the offence under section 58 of the Abkari<\/p>\n
act and accordingly he was sentenced to undergo rigorous<\/p>\n
imprisonment for a period of 3 years and to pay a fine of<\/p>\n
Rs.1,00,000\/-(Rs.one lakh only).        It is also ordered  to<\/p>\n
undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 6 months in<\/p>\n
case of default of payment of fine amount. It is the above<\/p>\n
finding  and conviction of the trial court      as well as the<\/p>\n
sentence being challenged in this appeal.<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1588\/2007
\n                               -:4:-<\/span><\/p>\n
      6. I have heard the counsel for the appellant Sri Liju<\/p>\n
M.P., appointed as State Brief,       and the learned Public<\/p>\n
prosecutor.    I  have perused the materials and evidence<\/p>\n
available   on record and also      considered the arguments<\/p>\n
advanced by the counsel for the appellant      as well as the<\/p>\n
public Prosecutor.\n<\/p>\n
      7. The crux of the prosecution allegations is that the<\/p>\n
accused was found in possession of 3 litres of illicit arrack in<\/p>\n
a 5 litre can when he was arrested on 13-4-1999. To prove<\/p>\n
the prosecution case, though six charge witnesses were<\/p>\n
cited, of whom CWs 4 and 5 were given up by the Public<\/p>\n
Prosecutor and others were examined as PWs.1 to 4. PW-5,<\/p>\n
the Thondy Section Clerk of the court of the Judicial First<\/p>\n
Class Magistrate, Neyyattinkara      was examined as PW-5<\/p>\n
additionally while the documents from the Chemical Lab was<\/p>\n
caused to be produced and marked as Exts.P7 to P9, in order<\/p>\n
to prove the validity of the Chemical report, Ext.P6. PWs 2 to<\/p>\n
4 are   the Excise Officials of whom PW2 is the Preventive<\/p>\n
Officer of the Amaravila Excise Range, who accompanied the<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1588\/2007
\n                                 -:5:-<\/span><\/p>\n
Detecting Officer,    the Excise Inspector of Amaravila Excise<\/p>\n
Range at the time of detection. Though PW-1 was cited to<\/p>\n
prove the seizure mahazar, he           turned hostile to the<\/p>\n
prosecution. The official witnesses deposed before the court<\/p>\n
in terms of the charge. PW-2 deposed that       they found the<\/p>\n
accused walking with a 5 litre can who, on suspicion, was<\/p>\n
intercepted and the excise officials verified the contents  of<\/p>\n
the can by smelling and tasting the liquid thereof and found<\/p>\n
to be illicit arrack and accordingly the  accused was arrested<\/p>\n
and       prepared    Ext.P1 mahazar.     PW-2 is one of the<\/p>\n
signatory of     Ext.P1 mahazar. He also deposed about     the<\/p>\n
procedure adopted by the excise officials while effecting the<\/p>\n
seizure, sealing of the can etc.        PW2 had categorically<\/p>\n
identified M.O-1 can     as well as the accused in the court.<\/p>\n
PW.3, the       detecting   officer deposed in favour of the<\/p>\n
prosecution and he corroborated the evidence of PW-2. The<\/p>\n
trial court found     that  though PWs-2 and 3 were      cross<\/p>\n
examined in detail, their evidence are unshaked believable<\/p>\n
and their versions are credible. PW-4, the Excise Inspector<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1588\/2007
\n                               -:6:-<\/span><\/p>\n
who conducted investigation, was cross examined for the<\/p>\n
defence side, but nothing was        brought out against the<\/p>\n
prosecution case.    Thus according to the prosecution, the<\/p>\n
charge against    the appellant\/accused proved correctly and<\/p>\n
the judgment of the court below is perfectly valid and the<\/p>\n
appellant deserves to be convicted.\n<\/p>\n
       8. On the other hand, the counsel for the appellant<\/p>\n
pointed out that the prosecution case itself is a false one.<\/p>\n
In order to substantiate the case, the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellant invited my attention to the deposition of PW-5, the<\/p>\n
Thondy Section Clerk of the trial court and submitted that<\/p>\n
the M.O-1 can does not contain      signature of the accused,<\/p>\n
witnesses and the detecting      officer.  On going   by the<\/p>\n
deposition of PW-5, it can be seen that on 13-4-1999, he had<\/p>\n
received the thondy article under Ext.P4 on verification of<\/p>\n
the tamper proof nature of the seal of the thondy that it<\/p>\n
was produced tamper proof that he registered the same in<\/p>\n
the     thondy Register in page 64 as T 213\/1999 which<\/p>\n
identified as Ext.P10. PWs 2 and 3 when cross examined in<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1588\/2007
\n                                -:7:-<\/span><\/p>\n
the court identified MO-1 can. They have also deposed in the<\/p>\n
court that Ext.P1 mahazar contains       their signature   and<\/p>\n
effectively sealed the can    in a tamper proof manner and<\/p>\n
labelled the same on the spot and prepared the crime and<\/p>\n
occurrence report.    It is also stated that the thondy article<\/p>\n
was received in Court on 13-4-1999 as T.213\/99 that the<\/p>\n
court received the thondy with the seal in a tamper proof<\/p>\n
condition. The evidence of PWs 2 and 3 corroborated the<\/p>\n
evidence of PW-5.\n<\/p>\n
      9. After an elaborate discussion and appreciation of the<\/p>\n
evidence of PW-5, the trial court found in favour of the<\/p>\n
prosecution regarding the sealing of MO-1, sampling and<\/p>\n
sending the samples for chemical examination in favour of<\/p>\n
the prosecution. Though PWs 2,3 and 5 were cross examined<\/p>\n
extensively, nothing was brought out        to disbelieve their<\/p>\n
version. The trial court found that the prosecution cannot be<\/p>\n
blamed for the omissions, if any, committed by the Thondy<\/p>\n
Section Clerk or by the learned Magistrate and it is also held<\/p>\n
that   the evidence adduced by the Thondy Section Clerk,<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1588\/2007
\n                              -:8:-<\/span><\/p>\n
PW-5, who is a public servant who deposed as the mouth<\/p>\n
piece of the learned Magistrate is uninterested, untainted,<\/p>\n
unbiased and without prejudice. Thus the trial court came<\/p>\n
into the conclusion that the sampling was effected properly<\/p>\n
and the sample bottle was made tamper proof and properly<\/p>\n
forwarded to the Chemical Examiner, in the same condition,<\/p>\n
without any interference from any quarters.<\/p>\n
      10. I am satisfied that the finding of the court below<\/p>\n
that the Chemical Examiner in the report, Ext.P6 certified<\/p>\n
that such a sample bottle was received there, the seal of<\/p>\n
which was tallied with the sample seal provided.<\/p>\n
      11. In this appeal, the only point for consideration is<\/p>\n
regarding   the   mode of seizure on M.O-1 and also the<\/p>\n
sampling etc.    about which I have    already discussed and<\/p>\n
came into the conclusion that the finding of the court below is<\/p>\n
correct and nothing brought out to take a different view.<\/p>\n
      12.   Counsel for the appellant submitted that the<\/p>\n
sentence awarded against the appellant is exorbitant and<\/p>\n
disproportionate to the    allegations levelled against him.<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1588\/2007
\n                               -:9:-<\/span><\/p>\n
Therefore, it is submitted that the sentence may be reduced.<\/p>\n
On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted<\/p>\n
that the appellant herein involved in four more cases besides<\/p>\n
the present one and therefore he is not entitled to get any<\/p>\n
leniency in the matter of sentence. Inviting my attention to<\/p>\n
the judgment dated 12-6-2008 in Crl.A.No.1586\/2007, the<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the appellant submitted that this Court<\/p>\n
in another case interfered and       reduced the substantial<\/p>\n
sentence and further requested that the same treatment may<\/p>\n
be given to the appellant in this case also. It is relevant to<\/p>\n
note that the     fine awarded in this case is the minimum<\/p>\n
amount of fine and therefore no interference is warranted at<\/p>\n
all.  According to me,      considering the entire facts and<\/p>\n
circumstances involved in the case,          the substantive<\/p>\n
sentence of rigorous imprisonment for three year and the<\/p>\n
default sentence of 6 months     can be reduced into Rigorous<\/p>\n
imprisonment      for a period of one year      and rigorous<\/p>\n
imprisonment      for a period of three months respectively.<\/p>\n
No other point brought to my notice for consideration.<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1588\/2007
\n                              -:10:-<\/span><\/p>\n
     13. In the result, this appeal is allowed partly and the<\/p>\n
conviction and sentence of fine imposed on the appellant are<\/p>\n
upheld. But the substantive sentence of imprisonment is<\/p>\n
modified   and reduced to one year and default sentence is<\/p>\n
also reduced to 3 months. As the trial court has already<\/p>\n
allowed set off, no separate order is necessary under that<\/p>\n
count.\n<\/p>\n
     14.   The    records shall be sent to the court below<\/p>\n
forthwith along with the copy of the judgment.        Revised<\/p>\n
warrant of commitment shall be issued by the court below<\/p>\n
immediately.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                 V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE<\/p>\n
kvm\/-\n<\/p>\n
CRL.A.NO.1588\/2007
\n                      -:11:-<\/span><\/p>\n
                               V.K.MOHANAN, J.\n<\/p>\n
                             CRL.A. No.1588\/2007<\/p>\n
                                        Judgment<\/p>\n
                                 Dated:19-6-2008<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court Thankappan vs State Of Kerala on 19 June, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM CRL.A.No. 1588 of 2007() 1. THANKAPPAN, S\/O.PAL PILLAI, … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA, … Respondent For Petitioner :LIJU MP[STATE BRIEF] For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR The Hon’ble MR. Justice V.K.MOHANAN Dated :19\/06\/2008 O R […]<\/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-98205","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThankappan vs State Of Kerala on 19 June, 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\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Thankappan vs State Of Kerala on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-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=\"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-12-02T21:48:17+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Thankappan vs State Of Kerala on 19 June, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-02T21:48:17+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1740,\"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\\\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008\",\"name\":\"Thankappan vs State Of Kerala on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-12-02T21:48:17+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Thankappan vs State Of Kerala on 19 June, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Thankappan vs State Of Kerala on 19 June, 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\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Thankappan vs State Of Kerala on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-12-02T21:48:17+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Thankappan vs State Of Kerala on 19 June, 2008","datePublished":"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-02T21:48:17+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008"},"wordCount":1740,"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\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008","name":"Thankappan vs State Of Kerala on 19 June, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-06-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-12-02T21:48:17+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/thankappan-vs-state-of-kerala-on-19-june-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Thankappan vs State Of Kerala on 19 June, 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:\/\/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\/98205","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=98205"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/98205\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=98205"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=98205"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=98205"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}