{"id":256,"date":"2019-12-23T06:00:42","date_gmt":"2019-12-23T06:00:42","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/philosopical-falcon.w5.wpsandbox.pro\/2019\/12\/19\/travel-copy-5-copy\/"},"modified":"2025-10-21T13:39:47","modified_gmt":"2025-10-21T13:39:47","slug":"woman-who-founded-sanctuary-for-animals-accused-in-their-deaths","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lawoftodaynews.com\/?p=256","title":{"rendered":"Karuppudayar vs. State Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Lalgudi Trichy and Ors. (31.01.2025 &#8211; SC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"title\" class=\"header\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">Karuppudayar vs. State Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Lalgudi Trichy and Ors. (31.01.2025 &#8211; SC)<\/span><\/div>\n<div id=\"citation\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">SC\/0129\/2025: 2025 INSC 132<\/span><\/div>\n<div><\/div>\n<div id=\"Gist1\">The Supreme Court of India addressed the appeal by Karuppudayar against the State and others, challenging the High Court of Madras&#8217;s dismissal of his petition to quash criminal proceedings under the SC-ST Act. The core issue was whether the alleged caste-based insult occurred &#8220;within public view,&#8221; a requirement under Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of the Act. The Court found that the incident took place within the complainant&#8217;s office, not in public view, thus not constituting an offence under the Act. Citing the precedent in Bhajan Lal, the Court quashed the High Court&#8217;s order and the charge-sheet, allowing the appeal.<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Karuppudayar vs. State Rep. by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Lalgudi Trichy and Ors. (31.01.2025 &#8211; SC) SC\/0129\/2025: 2025 INSC<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2175,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"gallery","meta":{"colormag_page_container_layout":"default_layout","colormag_page_sidebar_layout":"default_layout","footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-256","post","type-post","status-publish","format-gallery","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-supreme-court","post_format-post-format-gallery"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawoftodaynews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/256","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawoftodaynews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawoftodaynews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawoftodaynews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawoftodaynews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=256"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/lawoftodaynews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/256\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2188,"href":"https:\/\/lawoftodaynews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/256\/revisions\/2188"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawoftodaynews.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/2175"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawoftodaynews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=256"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawoftodaynews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=256"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawoftodaynews.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=256"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}