DEEP CHAND Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
LAWS(SC)-1961-3-55
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: RAJASTHAN)
Decided on March 30,1961

DEEP CHAND Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

AMIRUDDIN AHMED V. EMPEROR [REFERRED]
LEGAL REMEMBRANCER V. LALIT MOHAN SINGH ROY [REFERRED]
NAZIR AHMAD V. KING EMPEROR [REFERRED]
JITENDRA NATH GUPTA VS. EMPEROR [REFERRED]



Cited Judgements :-

PRAKASH ISHWARBHAI PATEL VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2024-1-119] [REFERRED TO]
MYSORE CEMENTS LTD VS. ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER [LAWS(KAR)-2002-2-48] [REFERRED TO]
AJAY PARIHAR VS. STATE OF HP & ORS [LAWS(HPH)-2016-5-43] [REFERRED TO]
BHUPINDER SINGH NEGI VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [LAWS(HPH)-2016-6-114] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAN LAL VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ORS [LAWS(HPH)-2017-7-76] [REFERRED TO]
RAVJIBHAI KANABHAI AHIR (DIED) VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2020-12-881] [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY SHANKAR PANDEY VS. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN.SECY.,DEPTT. OF APPOINTMENT & ANR. [LAWS(ALL)-2017-5-13] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P. THROUGH CHIEF SECY. LKO. & ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2017-5-27] [REFERRED TO]
ANJALI DEVI (PRADHAN) VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2019-5-249] [REFERRED TO]
DEVENDRA PRATAP SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(ALL)-2011-7-13] [REFERRED TO]
U.P.Shaskiya Adhivakta Kalyan Samiti, 8, Mustafa Market, SI VS. State of U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2012-1-307] [REFERRED TO]
RAMBALI VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2012-5-272] [REFERRED TO]
MANSA RAM YADAV VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2009-5-647] [REFERRED TO]
LEELA KARWAL VS. J D KARWAL [LAWS(ALL)-1985-10-15] [REFERRED TO]
MUKESH KHAMPARIYA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2023-10-115] [REFERRED TO]
K.KARNAMAHARAJAN VS. REGISTRAR, [LAWS(MAD)-2020-1-595] [REFERRED TO]
K.KARNAMAHARAJAN VS. REGISTRAR, [LAWS(MAD)-2020-1-595] [REFERRED TO]
ROOPA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2000-2-67] [REFERRED TO]
LAXMAN DAS VS. DEOJI MAL [LAWS(RAJ)-2002-9-31] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. S SHAINAMOL [LAWS(KER)-2017-2-170] [REFERRED TO]
RAJIV PUJARI VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2010-11-19] [REFERRED TO]
RAMCHANDRA KESHAV ADKE VS. GOVIND JOTI CHAVARE [LAWS(SC)-1975-3-23] [APPLIED]
MANAS KUMAR SWAIN VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2019-12-26] [REFERRED TO]
LUXMI TEA COMPANY PVT. LIMITED VS. STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(TRIP)-2019-9-81] [REFERRED TO]
PADMA LOCHAN DAS AND ORS. VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2008-9-56] [REFERRED TO]
M MOKKAIYAN VS. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FISHERIES DEPARTMENT MADURAI [LAWS(MAD)-1999-2-105] [REFERRED TO]
P PAULPANDIAN VS. REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES [LAWS(MAD)-2002-11-41] [REFERRED TO]
THE STATE VS. DEBRAJ BHAKTA AND 6 ORS. [LAWS(ORI)-1967-8-16] [REFERRED TO]
GOEL SPINNING AND WEAVING MILLS VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2006-5-341] [REFERRED]
K.RAVINDRAN VS. CHANCELLOR TAMIL UNIVERSITY [LAWS(MAD)-2019-12-400] [REFERRED TO]
LALITHA JAIN VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2007-11-112] [REFERRED]
MURUGASAMY VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2017-9-8] [REFERRED TO]
GHANASHYAM SHARMA VS. STATE OF SIKKIM [LAWS(SIK)-2022-9-16] [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF INFORMATION COMMR VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(SC)-2011-12-16] [REFERRED TO]
BADSHAH SINGH VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2015-9-158] [REFERRED TO]
SADHAVNA HP GAS, PATNA VS. HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD , PATNA AND OTHERS [LAWS(PAT)-2017-7-143] [REFERRED TO]
TUMALAPALLI VINAY VEERABAHDRA RAO VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-2021-8-92] [REFERRED TO]
K.LAZAR BABU VS. A.P. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION [LAWS(APH)-2021-7-83] [REFERRED TO]
AGRICULTURE PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE UNJHA VS. CHIEF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER [LAWS(GJH)-2015-8-79] [REFERRED TO]
NRUPAL NARENDRABHAI DALWADI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT THRO SECRETARY [LAWS(GJH)-2017-5-156] [REFERRED TO]
V GUNDA REDDY VS. SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE [LAWS(KAR)-2005-8-30] [REFERRED TO]
BHAGIRATHI BAI VS. PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS A P SAIFABAD HYDERABAD [LAWS(APH)-1999-7-5] [REFERRED TO]
SMT. SALMA KHATOON VS. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2016-8-327] [REFERRED TO]
KULDEEP SAXENA VS. SMT. ARCHANA SAXENA & 6 OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2017-8-261] [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL KUMAR VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2003-10-177] [REFERRED TO]
CHHATRAPAL SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2003-9-193] [REFERRED TO]
RADHA GOVIND MAHAVIDYALAYA VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2009-10-54] [REFERRED TO]
RATANLAL NATH VS. THE STATE OF TRIPURA AND ORS. [LAWS(GAU)-1994-5-12] [REFERRED TO]
TALEB ALI VS. STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(GAU)-2007-9-42] [REFERRED TO]
SIMBHOLI SUGARS LTD VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2010-4-132] [REFERRED TO]
SARASWATI INTER COLLEGE PIPALHEDA, MUZAFFAR NAGAR VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2012-9-3] [REFERRED TO]
BRIDLY FORD PASSAH VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-2005-12-73] [REFERRED TO]
DR. AVINASH AGNIHOTRY S/O MR. S.P.B. AGNIHOTRY, MASCON GLOBAL LIMITED VS. GMAIL.COM AND GOOGLE INC. [LAWS(CYAT)-2010-5-2] [REFERRED TO]
BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD VS. HARYANA TELECOM LTD [LAWS(DLH)-2010-8-51] [REFERRED TO]
BABU VERGHESE VS. BAR COUNCIL OF KERALA [LAWS(SC)-1999-3-38] [REFERRED 1962 1 SCR 662 :]
MACKINON MACKENZIE & COMPANY LTD VS. MACKINNON EMPLOYEES UNION [LAWS(SC)-2015-2-80] [REFERRED TO]
NIRMAL CHANDRA JENA VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2012-11-36] [REFERRED TO]
Capital Bar Association, Bhubaneswar VS. State of Odisha [LAWS(ORI)-2012-12-30] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDER PRAKASH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1999-6-8] [REFERRED TO]
MANOHAR SINGH MARWAHA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-2002-4-8] [REFERRED TO]
ANIL PADEGAONKAR VS. BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION [LAWS(MPH)-2003-6-22] [REFERRED TO]
KUNHAMBU K VS. PRESIDING OFFICER DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL BANGALORE [LAWS(KAR)-2001-7-37] [REFERRED TO]
VYSHALI MAHILA SAMAJ VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2002-8-52] [REFERRED TO]
VIJAYA BANK EMPLOYEES HOUSING CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER BANGLORE [LAWS(KAR)-2007-2-26] [REFERRED TO]
DR. SUSHANT DESHTA VS. STATE OF H.P. AND OTHERS [LAWS(HPH)-2016-12-47] [REFERRED TO]
MELUKKARA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD VS. JOINT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE S [LAWS(KER)-2018-2-287] [REFERRED TO]
PRAKASH CHANDRA TRIPATHI VS. STATE OF U P AND 6 ORS [LAWS(ALL)-2016-8-190] [REFERRED]
MUNNI LAL YADAV VS. STATE OF U.P. AND 9 ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2016-9-359] [REFERRED TO]
SARTAJ VS. STATE OF UP [LAWS(ALL)-2010-7-114] [REFERRED TO]
DHARAM RAJ SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2011-1-22] [REFERRED TO]
PHOOLPATI VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2012-5-281] [REFERRED TO]
U.P.STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION VS. SUNIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA [LAWS(ALL)-2013-3-55] [REFERRED TO]
PRAVEEN KUMAR JAIN VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-1-81] [REFERRED TO]
PRAMOD MORESHWAR TATTU VS. SUBDIVISIONAL OFFICER, BARAMATI AND OTHERS [LAWS(BOM)-2018-7-110] [REFERRED TO]
RAM ASREY LAL RAJENDRA KUMAR VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2005-3-202] [REFERRED TO]
MANJULA PANT VS. BHATKHANDE MUSIC INSTITUTE A DEEMED UNIVERSITY LUCKNOW [LAWS(ALL)-2009-4-261] [REFERRED TO]
LAXMI VERMA VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(SC)-2010-4-60] [REFERRED TO]
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD VS. D P JAIN [LAWS(NCD)-2007-5-38] [REFERRED TO]
T N SANDHYA VS. JALAJA KUMARI [LAWS(KER)-2008-7-27] [REFERRED TO]
VARUNI BIOMASS ENERGY PRODUCTS PRIVATE LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, K.K. SURENDRANATH AND K.K. DINAKARAN VS. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-2008-9-517] [REFERRED TO]
UMED HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL JODHPUR VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1999-4-30] [REFERRED]
ZUARI CEMENT LTD. VS. REGIONAL DIRECTOR E.S.I.C. HYDERABAD AND ORS. [LAWS(SC)-2015-7-22] [REFERRED TO]
H G SHEELA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2006-1-94] [REFERRED TO]
ASHISH KUMAR VS. MOHAMMED [LAWS(KAR)-2009-1-34] [REFERRED TO]
T. SUNEEL KUMAR VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2013-3-61] [REFERRED TO]
RAMESH CHANDRA MISHRA VS. U. P. SECONDARY EDUCATION SERVICES COMMISSION, ALLAHABAD AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-1990-4-97] [REFERRED TO]
GANESH PRASAD VS. L D A LUCKNOW [LAWS(ALL)-2011-10-49] [REFERRED TO]
PARAS VS. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION [LAWS(ALL)-2012-9-258] [REFERRED TO]
NARENDRA NATH SIROTHIA VS. VICE [LAWS(ALL)-1984-10-43] [REFERRED TO]
SAMARJEET TIWARI VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2009-4-529] [REFERRED TO]
MANSA RAM YADAV VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2009-5-110] [REFERRED TO]
RAMGOPAL BAJAJ VS. SECRETARYMUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION GOVT OF A P [LAWS(APH)-2006-6-95] [REFERRED TO]
JAISHANKAR VS. SELVARAJ ESTATE OFFICER & CHIEF ENGINEER INTEGRAL COACH FACTORY [LAWS(MAD)-2016-8-139] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. DEO MINES AND MINERALS PVT. LTD. VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2012-4-60] [REFERRED TO]
A MARIYAYEE VS. COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY PROHIBITION AND EXCISE DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-1998-7-123] [REFERRED TO]
MOHMD YAQOOB SHAH VS. GHULAM RASOOL WANI [LAWS(J&K)-2004-5-15] [REFERRED TO]
P L LILLY VS. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT [LAWS(KER)-2003-6-2] [REFERRED TO]
KOYAKUTTY THANGAL, S/O HABEEB KOYA THANGAL VS. KAVUNNI RAJA [LAWS(KER)-2014-8-876] [REFERRED TO]
PREM LAL SHARMA VS. HIRA LAL & ORS [LAWS(HPH)-2018-5-47] [REFERRED TO]
KENNEL CLUB OF INDIA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MAD)-2013-2-33] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA POULTRY FARM AND ORS. VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2015-8-10] [REFERRED TO]
QAMAR AHSAN VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2020-11-10] [REFERRED TO]
MALA RAMLOO VS. DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND TAHSILDAR [LAWS(TLNG)-2023-3-133] [REFERRED TO]
K VIVEK REDDY VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-2010-9-22] [REFERRED TO]
DHRUVA CHAND VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2016-1-238] [REFERRED TO]
RAM NIVAS VS. STATE OF U. P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-9-156] [REFERRED TO]
ALL INDIA RESEARCHERS COORDINATION COMMITTEE VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2010-12-129] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. DIKSHA SINGH [LAWS(ALL)-2011-8-221] [REFERRED TO]
RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LIMITED VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2012-9-9] [REFERRED TO]
AMRENDRA NARAYAN SINGH VS. REMOTE SENSING APPLICATION CENTRE LKO.THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT [LAWS(ALL)-2013-9-12] [REFERRED TO]
VIRENDRA KUMAR DIXIT VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2014-10-43] [REFERRED TO]
KEYA KAR VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2013-3-99] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF M P & ANOTHER VS. ARUN PRAKASH YADAV [LAWS(MPH)-2013-12-256] [REFERRED]
RAGHAVENDRA H. K. VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2021-1-98] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2022-4-62] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. VIJAYAN ALIAS RAJAN [LAWS(KER)-1984-11-18] [REFERRED TO]
RADHELAL GUPTA VS. STATE BAR COUNCIL OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-2002-2-80] [REFERRED TO]
A ELUMALAI VS. ADMINISTRATOR CUM LT GOVERNOR OF PONDICHERRY [LAWS(MAD)-2001-1-43] [REFERRED]
VENKATASUBRAMANYAN VS. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER AND COMMISSIONER OF LAND REFORMS [LAWS(MAD)-2009-11-205] [RELIED ON]
JOGENDRA NATH VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-1977-2-3] [REFERRED TO]
CHONGTHAM YAIMBI DEVI VS. STATE OF MANIPUR [LAWS(GAU)-2007-9-27] [REFERRED TO]
KESARI DEVI VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2005-8-185] [REFERRED TO]
COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT K S INTER COLLEGE MAHRARA VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2009-7-81] [REFERRED TO]
M.D. U.P. STATE BRIDGE CORP. LTD. VS. ABUL KALAM AZAD [LAWS(ALL)-2017-12-362] [REFERRED TO]
MAHARSHI DAYANAND HIGH SCHOOL JAUNPUR VS. COLLECTOR/DISTRICT D D C JAUNPUR [LAWS(ALL)-2011-4-210] [REFERRED TO]
COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2012-1-215] [REFERRED TO]
RAM PRATAP VS. DEPUTY DIRECTOR [LAWS(ALL)-2013-1-170] [REFERRED TO]
SANDEEP SHARADCHANDRA THAKUR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2014-9-251] [REFERRED TO]
KUNHAMBU K VS. PRESIDING OFFICER, DEBT RECOVERY TRIBUNAL [LAWS(KAR)-2001-7-114] [REFERRED]
RAMESH VERMA VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2022-9-52] [REFERRED TO]
SATISH KUMAR VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2022-9-117] [REFERRED TO]
PRAMOD KUMAR SINGH VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2010-1-95] [REFERRED TO]
MAHESH PRASAD SINGH VS. SATRUGHAN SINHA, SON OF LATE BHUVNESHWARI PRASAD SINHA [LAWS(PAT)-2012-9-9] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. SINGHARA SINGH [LAWS(SC)-1963-8-9] [DOUBTED]
R K VYAS VS. M D S UNIVERSITY AJMER [LAWS(RAJ)-2001-2-44] [REFERRED TO]
SARAVANAN VS. STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE CB-CID [LAWS(MAD)-2019-2-127] [REFERRED TO]
SWASTIK AGENCY VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [LAWS(ORI)-2009-1-7] [REFERRED TO]
MUNSHI RAM AND ORS. VS. STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND ORS. [LAWS(J&K)-2016-4-7] [REFERRED TO]
D Narayanappa VS. State of Karnataka [LAWS(KAR)-2004-11-11] [REFERRED TO]
IN RE: KARUPPAN ALIAS MONDI VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-1969-7-21] [REFERRED]
SUO MOTU VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2021-8-4] [REFERRED TO]
RAS BIHARI PASWAN VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2023-5-19] [REFERRED TO]
DEVASHIS BHARRACHARYA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2009-4-271] [REFERRED TO]
ATAR SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2012-12-39] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA GOPAL S/O SHIV SHANKER LAL VS. STATE OF U P THR.PRIN.SECY.REVENUE [LAWS(ALL)-2013-10-13] [REFERRED TO]
BANKEY LAL VS. DEPUTY DIRECTOR [LAWS(ALL)-2013-2-126] [REFERRED TO]
N GOPI KUMAR AC PLANT OPERATOR VENKATESWARA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES TIRUPATI CHITTOOR DISTRICT VS. DIRECTOR SRI VENKATESWARA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES TIRUPATI CHITTOOR DISTRICT [LAWS(APH)-2003-1-28] [REFERRED TO]
D SIDDAPPA VS. TASSILDAR DOMA MANDAL [LAWS(APH)-2011-4-43] [REFERRED TO]
QUADRI BEGUM VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2009-7-131] [REFERRED TO]
BIMAL KUMAR RAJ VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2019-7-133] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. GLOBAL FEEDS VS. MANOJ KUMAR DAS AND OTHERS [LAWS(ORI)-2018-8-25] [REFERRED TO]
BABLU VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2021-4-39] [REFERRED TO]
AKHIL BHARATIYA PARYABARAN EWAM GRAMIN VIKAS SASTAN VS. COMMISSIONER, BHUBANESWAR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION [LAWS(ORI)-2012-1-62] [REFERRED TO]
THE MANAGER, ST. DOMINICS COLLEGE VS. JOSEPH CHACKO AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-2015-9-35] [REFERRED TO]
BEENA JOLLY VS. STATE OF KERALA AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-2015-9-57] [REFERRED TO]
RAM CHANDRA JOSHI AND VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1999-9-18] [REFFERED TO : AIR 1961 SC 1527 16]
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH (NOW STATE OF TELANGANA) VS. A.P. STATE WAKF BOARD [LAWS(SC)-2022-2-24] [REFERRED TO]
HEERA LAL VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2001-5-28] [REFERRED TO]
KARTHIKEYAN VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE [LAWS(KER)-2010-12-474] [REFERRED TO]
MADRAS SANSKRIT COLLEGE AND S S V PATASALA VS. CHENNAI METROPOLITAN WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE BOARD [LAWS(MAD)-2009-7-644] [REFERRED TO]
K P NAZEER VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2000-1-32] [REFERRED TO]
STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION VS. C.V. RAJENDRAN [LAWS(KER)-2022-10-268] [REFERRED TO]
NARAYAN SINGH AMAR SINGH VS. STATE [LAWS(MPH)-1965-4-27] [REFERRED TO]
DINESH KUMAR VS. DY REGISTRAR, COOP SOCIETY, MEERUT AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2016-5-478] [REFERRED]
JAUHARI AND ORS. VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2017-9-176] [REFERRED TO]
BHANU PRATAP SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2019-1-86] [REFERRED TO]
RAM MURTI DEVI VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2021-3-109] [REFERRED TO]
B.K.SHAH MEDICAL INSTITUTE AND RESEARCH CENTRE VS. BOARD OF GOVERNORS IN SUPER SESSION OF MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2013-6-18] [REFERRED TO]
LAXMI VIJAY VERMA VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2009-8-74] [REFERRED TO]
KARMYOGI SHELTERS PVT LTD VS. BENARSI KRISHNA COMMITTEE [LAWS(DLH)-2010-5-6] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U.P VS. NARENDRA SINGH [LAWS(ALL)-2010-7-184] [REFERRED TO]
SHREE NARAYAN SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2013-10-65] [REFERRED TO]
REGISTRAR CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES VS. DEEPAK TYAGI [LAWS(DLH)-2021-4-113] [REFERRED TO]
MAHAVIR SAHKARI AVAS SAMITILTD VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2006-9-238] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ASSAM VS. UPENDRA NATH RAJKHOWA [LAWS(GAU)-1974-8-1] [REFERRED TO]
MILIND HARAMAN MESHRAM VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2008-4-20] [REFERRED TO]
D SIDDAPPA VS. TAHSILDAR DOMAMANDAL DOMA RANGA REDDY DISTRICT [LAWS(APH)-2010-4-128] [REFERRED TO]
NATWARSINH BADARSINH RATHOD VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2014-2-275] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

Subba Rao, J. - (1.)This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan dated August 1, 1958, confirming the Judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Churu, dated May 3, 1957, in so far as he convicted the appellant under Ss. 347, 365 and 386, I. P. C. and setting aside his order acquitting the appellant under S. 458, I. P. C., and convicting the appellant under S. 452, I. P. C. the learned Additional Sessions Judge sentenced the appellant for the offences under Ss. 347, 365 and 386, I. P. C., to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 year, 2 years and 3 1/2 years respectively. The High Court enhanced the sentences in respect of the offences under Ss. 347 and 386, I. P. C., to 3 years and 8 years respectively, and also imposed a fine of Rs. 20,000/- on the appellant; the sentence in regard to the offence under S. 365, I. P. C., was confirmed. The High Court further found that the appellant was guilty under S. 352, I. P. C., also and for that offence it sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years.
(2.)At the outset it would be convenient to state briefly the case of the prosecution. One Kashiram, a prosperous businessman, was residing at Sidhmugh. His only son Suraj Bhan was living at Rajgarh where he was carrying on an independent business of his own. On November 12, 1954, when Suraj Bhan was at his desk in his house, somebody made an enquiry whether one Rameshwar was there, to which Suraj Bhan replied in the negative. A few minutes thereafter, two men with masks entered the room and one of them was armed with a revolver. The said two persons threatened to shoot Suraj Bhan if he made any noise and then took him outside the house where two camels were kept waiting attended by two other persons similarly masked. After covering the face of Suraj Bhan by tying a cloth round his neck, he was made to mount one of the camels. The two persons who pulled Suraj Bhan out of his house also mounted the same camel, one in front of Suraj Bhan and the other behind him. After firing some shots in the air, presumably to prevent pursuit, the said persons, along with Suraj Bhan, left the place. After riding for 3 or 4 hours, the camels were made to stop on a railway line, the said persons got down from the camel, Suraj Bhan was also made to get down, and all of them went along the railway line for 3 or 4 furlongs. Thereafter, Suraj Bhan was taken to the house of the Deep Chand, the appellant, in village Kalari and was kept there in confinement in a small room for 17 days. During the entire period he was kept blindfolded. Two or three days after the abduction, Suraj Bhan was made to write three letters to his father and put down his father's address on the envelopes. He was made to write these letters under the cover of a blanket after his bandage was removed temporarily. In the first letter he was made to write that if his father reported the matter to the police, he would not see his son again; in the second letter, he was made to inform his father that in view of the attempts made by his father to trace him, his abductors had made up their minds not to release him, but in view of his entreaties they had agreed to release him on payment of a ransom of Rs. 60,000/-; and in the third letter, he was made to write that the money should be handed over to the bearer of the letter and that he would be released on such payment. After the receipt of the first two letters by Kashi Ram, the abductors entered on the second stage of negotiations. Meanwhile, to facilitate the smooth conduct of the negotiations, on November 29, 1954, Suraj Bhan was removed to the house of one Lachhman and was confined there till his release. Kashi Ram has a son-in-law by name Shiv Bhagwan, the son of one Durga Parshad. Dhannaram and Shiv Bhagwan knew each other. Dhannaram offered to help Kashi Ram to get the release of his son. Dhannaram gave a letter addressed to Deep Chand to Durga Parshad wherein Deep Chand was requested to render his help in the matter of the release of Suraj Bhan. On the basis of the letter, Durga Parshad contacted Deep Chand, who promised to do his best in the matter. After further talks, Dhannaram met Shiv bhagwan and told him that Suraj Bhan was alive but a large sum would be required as ransom to get his release. He also warned him not to divulge the secret, for, if he did so, not only the life of Suraj Bhan but also of other relations would be in danger. He demanded Rs. 70,000/- as ransom, but after some higgling it was fixed at Rs. 50,000/-. The third letter written by Suraj Bhan at the instance of Deep Chand was shown to Shiv Bhagwan and to his father Durga Parshad to assure them that Suraj Bhan was alive. After satisfying themselves of the bona fides of the negotiations conduced by Dhannaram, Shiv Bhagwan and Durga Parshad went to the house of Dhannaram where they found Deep Chand. The sum of Rs. 50,000/- was paid to Dhannaram and Deep Chand; and both of them counted the money. The money was paid on December 17, 1954, and Suraj Bhan was released on December 20, 1954.
(3.)Five persons, namely, Deep Chand, Sisram, Jiwan Ram, Dhannaram and Ramji Lal, were prosecuted in the Sessions Court for the aforesaid offences. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted Ramji Lal, Dhannaram and Jiwan Ram, and convicted Sisram under Ss. 347 and 365, I. P. C., and Deep Chand as aforesaid. Nothing more need be said about the conviction of Sisram, as on appeal he was acquitted by the High Court and no appeal was preferred by the State against his acquittal. The learned Sessions Judge, on a consideration of the entire evidence placed before him, held that there was overwhelming evidence to show that Deep Chand detained Suraj Bhan in his house for sometime and thereafter in Lachhman's house and released him on payment of a ransom. But he held that there was not sufficient evidence to find definitely that Deep Chand participated in the abduction of Suraj Bhan on November 12, 1954, from the latter's house. On these findings, he convicted Deep Chand under Ss. 347, 365 and 386, I. P. C. Deep Chand preferred an appeal against his conviction, and the State filed an appeal against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge in so far as he acquitted Deep Chand of the offence under S. 458, I. P. C. The State also preferred a revision for enhancing the sentences passed on Deep Chand. All the matters were heard together by the High Court and, on a resurvey of the entire evidence, it agreed with the Sessions Judge that Suraj Bhan was confined in the house of Deep Chand and later on in the house of Lachhman and that he extorted money from Kashi Ram by putting him under fear of death of his son, Suraj Bhan. Disagreeing with the Sessions Judge, the High Court further held that it had been established on the evidence that Deep Chand was one of the persons who abducted Suraj Bhan from his house on November 12, 1954. In the result, the High Court convicted the appellant not only under Ss. 347. 365 and 386. I. P. C., but also under S. 452 thereof. In the matter of enhancement of the sentences it was of the view that the case deserved an exemplary punishment and, therefore, it enhanced the sentenced as aforesaid. Deep Chand preferred the present appeal by special leave.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.