{"id":105661,"date":"2009-10-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-10-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009"},"modified":"2018-03-01T03:46:22","modified_gmt":"2018-02-28T22:16:22","slug":"hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009","title":{"rendered":"Hukum Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 October, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Chattisgarh High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Hukum Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 October, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n              HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR      \n\n\n\n                    Criminal Appeal No. 787 of 2006\n\n\n\n\n               Hukum Singh\n                          ...Petitioners\n\n\n                   VERSUS\n\n                         State of Chhattisgarh\n                                              ...Respondents\n\n\n\n\n!               Shri  Jitendra Gupta and  Shri  Rishi\n                Rahul Soni counsel for the appellant\n\n\n^                Shri   Pravin   Das   GA   for    the\n                 respondents\/State\n\n\n\nHon Mr Justice Pritinker Diwaker\n\n\n\n       Dated:23\/10\/2009\n\n\n:       Judgment\n\n\n\n  CRIMINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 374 OF THE CODE OF            \n                 CRIMINAL PROCEDURE.\n\n                    J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n<p>                                 (23 .10.2009)<\/p>\n<p>     The appellant in this appeal is challenging the<br \/>\nlegality,  validity and propriety  of  the  judgment<br \/>\ndated  25.9.2006  passed by the Additional  Sessions<br \/>\nJudge,   Durg   in  Sessions  Trial   No.   248\/2005<br \/>\nconvicting   the  accused\/appellant  under   Section<br \/>\n376(1)  of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing  him<br \/>\nto  undergo  rigorous imprisonment for  seven  years<br \/>\nwith  fine of Rs. 500, in default of payment of fine<br \/>\nto  further  undergo  simple  imprisonment  for  six<br \/>\nmonths.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.   Facts of the case in brief are that on 1.8.2005<br \/>\nFIR<br \/>\nEx. P-13 was lodged by the prosecutrix to the effect<br \/>\nthat  on  30.7.2005  when  she  was  at  home,   the<br \/>\naccused\/appellant who happens to be  her  father-in-<br \/>\nlaw   came  to  her,  offered  her  some  sweet  and<br \/>\nthereafter  committed rape on her. Further  case  of<br \/>\nthe  prosecution is that when in the night  she  was<br \/>\nsleeping  with her husband, accused\/appellant  again<br \/>\ncame there and set her on fire. Thereafter, she  was<br \/>\nsent  for  medical examination to District Hospital,<br \/>\nDurg where Dr. (Smt.) Shobha Rajput (PW-10) examined<br \/>\nher  and  gave her report Ex. P-10. In  the  medical<br \/>\nreport,  the  doctor has opined that the prosecutrix<br \/>\nwas  having 40 per cent burn injuries, her secondary<br \/>\nsexual  characteristics were fully developed,  hymen<br \/>\nwas  absent  and  two  fingers  easily  entered  her<br \/>\nvagina.   Accused\/appellant    was  also  sent   for<br \/>\nmedical  examination  to  Community  Health  Centre,<br \/>\nAhiwara  where Dr. Dushyant Khosla examined him  and<br \/>\nvide  his  report  Ex. P-24 he opined  that  he  was<br \/>\ncapable  of  performing sexual intercourse.  Vaginal<br \/>\nslides   were   prepared  and  sent   for   chemical<br \/>\nexamination  vide  Ex. P-21 and the  report  of  the<br \/>\nchemical  analyzer  is  Ex.  P-23.   Thereafter,  on<br \/>\ncompletion of investigation charge sheet  was  filed<br \/>\nagainst the accused\/appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.    So  as  to hold the accused\/appellant  guilty,<br \/>\nprosecution  has examined as many as  14  witnesses.<br \/>\nStatement of the accused\/appellant was also recorded<br \/>\nunder  section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure<br \/>\nin  which he denied the charges levelled against him<br \/>\nand  pleaded his innocence and false implication  in<br \/>\nthe case.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.    After hearing the parties the trial Court  has<br \/>\nconvicted  and  sentenced the  accused\/appellant  as<br \/>\nmentioned  above. However, he has been acquitted  of<br \/>\nthe charge under section 307 IPC.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.    Heard counsel for the parties and perused  the<br \/>\nmaterial  available on record including the judgment<br \/>\nimpugned.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.    Counsel for the accused\/appellant submits that<br \/>\nthe  statement  of  the prosecutrix  being  full  of<br \/>\ncontradictions  is  not  worthy  of  safe  reliance.<br \/>\nAccording   to  him  in  paragraph   No.6   of   her<br \/>\nexamination  she  has  stated  that  for   fear   of<br \/>\nhumiliation in the society, she put herself on  fire<br \/>\nwhereas  in  paragraph No.3 of  her  examination  in<br \/>\nchief she has stated that the accused\/appellant  had<br \/>\nput  her  on  fire and it is on the  basis  of  such<br \/>\ncontradictory version the trial Court has  acquitted<br \/>\nhim of the offence under section 307 IPC. He submits<br \/>\nthat   once   on  the  same  set  of  evidence   the<br \/>\naccused\/appellant has been acquitted of the  offence<br \/>\nunder  section  307  IPC, he  could  not  have  been<br \/>\nconvicted for the offence under section 376 (1)  IPC<br \/>\nwhen  no  other material was brought  forth  by  the<br \/>\nprosecution.  He  further  submits  that  there   is<br \/>\ncontradiction in her statement and in the  FIR  with<br \/>\nrespect  to the time of the incident as in  the  FIR<br \/>\nthe  time  has been shown as 6 p.m. whereas  in  her<br \/>\nstatement  it is shown as 10 p.m. According  to  him<br \/>\nwhen  the prosecutrix is not sure about the time  of<br \/>\nincident,  it  is  proved that she  has  made  false<br \/>\nallegations   against   the  accused\/appellant.   He<br \/>\nsubmits  that  the  prosecutrix  has  not  made  any<br \/>\nattempt to save herself nor has she raised any alarm<br \/>\nwhen   the  offence  was  being  committed  by   the<br \/>\naccused\/appellant.  He  submits  that  the   medical<br \/>\nreport  also  does  not  support  the  case  of  the<br \/>\nprosecution  as  the  doctor who  examined  her  has<br \/>\nopined  that  she was habitual to sexual intercourse<br \/>\nand  therefore  no definite opinion  regarding  rape<br \/>\ncould  be given. The last contention of the  counsel<br \/>\nfor the appellant is that the most important witness<br \/>\ncould  have  been  the husband  of  the  prosecutrix<br \/>\nnamely  Raghunandan  Yadav  but  he  has  not   been<br \/>\nexamined  by  the  prosecution  and  therefore   the<br \/>\nappellant is entitled for acquittal.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.     On   the   other   hand   counsel   for   the<br \/>\nrespondent\/State supports the impugned judgment  and<br \/>\nsubmits   that  though  the  prosecutrix  has   been<br \/>\ndeclared  hostile, she has categorically  stated  in<br \/>\nher  evidence that she was subjected to rape by  the<br \/>\naccused\/appellant. She has further stated that as in<br \/>\nthe  sweet  given  to  her by the  accused\/appellant<br \/>\nthere was some intoxicant, she was not in a position<br \/>\nto  save  herself from the beastly clutches  of  the<br \/>\nappellant.  He submits that in the cross examination<br \/>\nthe  prosecutrix has categorically stated as to  the<br \/>\nmanner   in   which   she  was   ravished   by   the<br \/>\naccused\/appellant when her husband was not at  home.<br \/>\nAccording to him no material has been brought by the<br \/>\ndefence to show as to why the accused\/appellant  has<br \/>\nbeen  falsely  implicated in the case and  in  these<br \/>\ncircumstances  the  statement  of  the   prosecutrix<br \/>\ncannot  be disbelieved. He further submits that  the<br \/>\nreport  of  the incident was lodged immediately  and<br \/>\neven  if the husband of the prosecutrix has not been<br \/>\nexamined,  her testimony which is supported  by  the<br \/>\nevidence  of her father Gokul Yadav (PW-5)  who  has<br \/>\ncategorically  stated  that his  daughter  i.e.  the<br \/>\nprosecutrix  has told him that the accused\/appellant<br \/>\ncommitted  rape on her and on account of  which  she<br \/>\nmade an attempt to commit suicide, is sufficient for<br \/>\nthe conviction of the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.    Heard counsel for the parties and perused  the<br \/>\nentire material available on record.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.    On  subjecting the evidence on record to close<br \/>\nanalysis,  it is clear beyond shadow of  doubt  that<br \/>\nthe     prosecutrix    was    ravished    by     the<br \/>\naccused\/appellant who unfortunately  happens  to  be<br \/>\nher  father  in law. In her evidence she has  stated<br \/>\nthat  not  only  she was sexually assaulted  by  the<br \/>\naccused\/appellant but an attempt was  also  made  by<br \/>\nthe   accused\/appellant  to  brand  her  as  insane.<br \/>\nProsecutrix  was also made to give the statement  of<br \/>\nher being insane just to secure acquittal. There  is<br \/>\nnot even an iota of evidence in support of the stand<br \/>\ntaken  by the accused\/appellant regarding his  false<br \/>\nimplication  in  the case. The most unfortunate  and<br \/>\ndeplorable  aspect  of  the case  in  hand  is  that<br \/>\naccused  is none else but the father in law  of  the<br \/>\nprosecutrix herself who has posed an indelible  scar<br \/>\non the sacred relationship between father in law and<br \/>\ndaughter in law. When after marriage a girl steps in<br \/>\nher  matrimonial home, the father-in-law is supposed<br \/>\nto  act  as father-in-fact and make every effort  to<br \/>\nget the heap of hopes cherished by her in her mental<br \/>\nslate  realized  more than her  expectations.  If  a<br \/>\nfather-in-law  assumes such a beastly character  and<br \/>\ninstead of saving the dignity of his own daughter in<br \/>\nlaw  tries  to  rewrite the history anew  putting  a<br \/>\nnever-washable blot on her psyche, they ought not to<br \/>\nbe let loose, rather tightening the noose around his<br \/>\nneck  should  be the ultimate judicial  desirability<br \/>\nfor undoing the injustice.\n<\/p>\n<p>10.  Having come across the entire pros and cons  of<br \/>\nthe  matter  the  only conclusion suitable  for  the<br \/>\noffenders  like appellant herein is the  apathy  not<br \/>\nsympathy.  Accordingly, this Court finds nothing  to<br \/>\ninterfere with the conviction and sentence  recorded<br \/>\nby the trial Court and to blow a life to the appeal.<br \/>\nAppeal being lifeless is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                             Judge<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Chattisgarh High Court Hukum Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 October, 2009 HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Criminal Appeal No. 787 of 2006 Hukum Singh &#8230;Petitioners VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh &#8230;Respondents ! Shri Jitendra Gupta and Shri Rishi Rahul Soni counsel for the appellant ^ Shri Pravin Das GA for the respondents\/State Hon [&hellip;]<\/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":[12,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-105661","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-chattisgarh-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.0 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Hukum Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Hukum Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-02-28T22:16:22+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Hukum Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 October, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-28T22:16:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1246,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Chattisgarh High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009\",\"name\":\"Hukum Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-10-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-28T22:16:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Hukum Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 October, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Hukum Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Hukum Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-02-28T22:16:22+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Hukum Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 October, 2009","datePublished":"2009-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-28T22:16:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009"},"wordCount":1246,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Chattisgarh High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009","name":"Hukum Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 October, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-10-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-28T22:16:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hukum-singh-vs-state-of-chhattisgarh-on-23-october-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Hukum Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 23 October, 2009"}]},{"@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\/105661","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=105661"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/105661\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=105661"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=105661"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=105661"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}