{"id":107957,"date":"2008-10-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-10-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008"},"modified":"2017-03-28T01:46:47","modified_gmt":"2017-03-27T20:16:47","slug":"mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008","title":{"rendered":"Mal Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 22 October, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Mal Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 22 October, 2008<\/div>\n
Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005                               1\n\n     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT\n                     CHANDIGARH\n\n                                        Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005\n                                        Date of Decision : 22.10.2008\nMal Singh S\/o Jagar Singh,                        ....Appellant\nresident of Rozawali.\n\n                              Versus\n\nThe State of Haryana                              ....Respondent\n\n\nCORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER\n\n          1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed\n          to see the judgment?\n          2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?\n          3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?\n\nPresent: Mr. Jitender Dhanda, Advocate,\n         for the appellant.\n\n          Mr. A.K.Jindal, AAG, Haryana,\n          for the respondent.\n\nSHAM SUNDER, J.\n<\/pre>\n
          This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated<\/p>\n
11.3.2005, and the order of sentence dated 12.3.2005, rendered by the<\/p>\n
Court of Addl. Sessions Judge, Fatehabad, vide which it convicted the<\/p>\n
accused\/appellant, for the offence, punishable under Section 15 of the<\/p>\n
Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter called<\/p>\n
as ‘the Act’ only) and sentenced him, to undergo rigorous imprisonment<\/p>\n
for a period of ten years, and to pay a fine of Rs.1 lac, and in default of<\/p>\n
payment of the same, to undergo simple imprisonment for another period<\/p>\n
of two years, for having been found in possession of 210 kgs. poppy-<\/p>\n
husk, without any permit or licence. However, Joginder Singh, accused,
\n Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005                               2<\/span><\/p>\n
was declared Proclaimed Offender, by the trial Court.<\/p>\n
2.        The facts, in brief, are that, on 29.5.1999, Raghubir Singh, ASI,<\/p>\n
P.S. Ratia, alongwith other police officials, was present at Lali Mor,<\/p>\n
Ratia, in connection with patrol duty, and crime checking. At that time, a<\/p>\n
secret information was received by him, that accused Mal Singh and<\/p>\n
Joginder Singh (already declared P.O.), were indulging in the smuggling<\/p>\n
of poppy-husk, will bring poppy-husk, in the car of accused Mal Singh,<\/p>\n
bearing No.MAE-1542, being driven by Mal Singh, from the side of<\/p>\n
village Sardarewala, take the same to Punjab via Nangal bridge, and if a<\/p>\n
picket was held, they could be apprehended, with a big haul of poppy-<\/p>\n
husk. On receipt of this information, Raghubir Singh, ASI, informed<\/p>\n
Rajesh Kumar, Naib Tehsildar, Ratia, and requested him, to reach the<\/p>\n
spot. After sometime, Rajesh Kumar, Naib Tehsildar, reached Lali Mor,<\/p>\n
Ratia, and a raiding party was constituted. Thereafter, the raiding party<\/p>\n
reached the bridge of Pakhara Canal, in the area of Village Nangal, and a<\/p>\n
picket was held. After sometime, the aforesaid car was seen coming from<\/p>\n
the side of Village Sardarewala, along the canal. It was stopped. Mal<\/p>\n
Singh, accused, was driving the car, whereas, Joginder Singh, accused,<\/p>\n
was sitting by his side.     On the directions of Naib Tehsildar, the<\/p>\n
Investigating   Officer, conducted the search of the car, and 6 bags,<\/p>\n
containing poppy-husk, were found lying there. Each bag was found<\/p>\n
containing 35 kgs. Poppy-husk. A sample of 100 grams, from each of the<\/p>\n
bags, was separated, and the remaining poppy-husk, was kept in the same<\/p>\n
bags. The samples, and the bags, containing the remaining poppy-husk,<\/p>\n
were converted into parcels, duly sealed, with the seal, and taken into<\/p>\n
possession, vide a separate recovery memo. Ruqa was sent to the Police
\n Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005                              3<\/span><\/p>\n
Station, on the basis whereof, formal FIR was registered. The accused<\/p>\n
were arrested. Rough site plan of the place of the recovery, was prepared.<\/p>\n
The statements of the witnesses, were recorded. The accused were<\/p>\n
arrested.    After the completion of investigation, the accused were<\/p>\n
challaned.\n<\/p>\n
3.          On appearance, in the Court, the copies of documents, relied<\/p>\n
upon by the prosecution, were supplied to the accused. Charge under<\/p>\n
Section 15 of the Act, was framed against them, to which they pleaded<\/p>\n
not guilty, and claimed judicial trial.\n<\/p>\n
4.          The prosecution, in support of its case, examined Ramesh<\/p>\n
Kumar, SI,      SI (PW-1), Hardish Kumar, Constable (PW-2), Tarsem<\/p>\n
Singh, HC, (PW-3), Jai Chand, Constable (PW-4), Dharmbir, ASI (PW-<\/p>\n
5), Raghubir Singh, ASI (PW-6), and Rajesh Kumar, Naib Tehsildar<\/p>\n
(PW-7).      Thereafter, the Public Prosecutor for the State, closed the<\/p>\n
prosecution evidence.\n<\/p>\n
5.          The statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C., were<\/p>\n
recorded, and they were put all the incriminating circumstances,<\/p>\n
appearing against them, in the prosecution evidence. They pleaded false<\/p>\n
implication.\n<\/p>\n
5-A.        When the case was fixed for defence evidence, and arguments,<\/p>\n
Joginder Singh, accused, absented from the Court, and ultimately, he was<\/p>\n
declared Proclaimed Offender.\n<\/p>\n
6.          After hearing the Public Prosecutor for the State, the Counsel<\/p>\n
for the accused, and, on going through the evidence, on record, the trial<\/p>\n
Court convicted and sentenced Mal Singh, accused, as stated<\/p>\n
hereinbefore.\n<\/p>\n
 Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005                                4<\/span><\/p>\n
7.        Feeling aggrieved, against the judgment of conviction, and the<\/p>\n
order of sentence, rendered by the trial Court, the instant appeal, was filed<\/p>\n
by Mal Singh, appellant.\n<\/p>\n
8.        I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties, and have gone<\/p>\n
through the evidence and record, of the case, carefully.<\/p>\n
9.        The Counsel for the appellant, at the very outset, submitted that<\/p>\n
though a secret information was received, by the Investigating Officer,<\/p>\n
yet the same was neither reduced into writing, nor sent to the officer<\/p>\n
superior, as a result whereof, there was complete violation of the<\/p>\n
mandatory provisions of Section 42 of the Act, leading to the vitation of<\/p>\n
conviction and sentence.       The submission of the Counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellant, in this regard, does not appear to be correct. The recovery, in<\/p>\n
this case, was effected from a car, at a public place, and not from an<\/p>\n
enclosed place. Under these circumstances, the provisions of Section 42<\/p>\n
of the Act, were not at all applicable to the instant case. On the other<\/p>\n
hand, the provisions of Section 43 of the Act, were applicable, to the<\/p>\n
instant case. With a view to properly deal with this plea, taken up, by the<\/p>\n
Counsel for the appellant, it would be appropriate to notice the provisions<\/p>\n
of Sections 42 and 43 of the Act, which read as under :-\n<\/p>\n
              “42. Power of entry, search, seizure and arrest without<\/p>\n
              warrant or authorization – (1) Any such officer (being an<\/p>\n
              officer superior in rank to a peon, sepoy or constable) of<\/p>\n
              the departments of central excise, narcotics, customs,<\/p>\n
              revenue, intelligence or any other department of the<\/p>\n
              Central Government or of the Border Security Force as is<\/p>\n
              empowered in this behalf by general or special order by the
\n Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005                              5<\/span><\/p>\n
            Central Government or any such officer (being an officer<\/p>\n
            superior in rank to a peon, sepoy or constable) of the<\/p>\n
            revenue, drugs control, excise, olice or any other<\/p>\n
            department of a State Government, if he has reasons to<\/p>\n
            believe from personal knowledge or information given by<\/p>\n
            any person and taken down in writing, that any narcotic<\/p>\n
            drug, or psychotropic substance, in respect of which an<\/p>\n
            offence punishable under Chapter IV has been committed<\/p>\n
            or any document or other article which may furnish<\/p>\n
            evidence of the commission of such offence is kept or<\/p>\n
            concealed in any building, conveyance or enclosed place,<\/p>\n
            may, between sunrise and sunset,<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                        (a)      enter into an search any such<\/p>\n
                        building, conveyance or place;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                        (b)      in case of resistance, break open any<\/p>\n
                        door and remove any which any obstacle to<\/p>\n
                        such entry;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                        (c)      seize such drug or substance and all<\/p>\n
                        materials used in the manufacture thereof and<\/p>\n
                        any   other   article   and   any       animal   or<\/p>\n
                        conveyance which has reason to believe to be<\/p>\n
                        liable to confiscation under this Act and any<\/p>\n
                        document or other article which he has reason<\/p>\n
                        to believe may furnish evidence of the<\/p>\n
                        commission of offence under Chapter IV<\/p>\n
                        relating to such drug or substance : and
\n Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005                               6<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                          (d)       detain and search, and, if he thinks<\/p>\n
                          proper, arrest any person whom he has reason<\/p>\n
                          to believe to have committed any offence<\/p>\n
                          punishable under Chapter IV relating to such<\/p>\n
                          drug or substance:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                        Provided that if such officer has reason to believe<\/p>\n
            that a search warrant or authorization cannot be obtained<\/p>\n
            without affording opportunity for the concealment of<\/p>\n
            evidence or facility for the escape of an offender, he may<\/p>\n
            enter and search such building, conveyance or enclosed<\/p>\n
            place at any time between sunset and sunrise after<\/p>\n
            recording the grounds of his belief.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            (2)         Where an offence takes down any information in<\/p>\n
            writing under sub-Section (1) or records grounds for his<\/p>\n
            belief under the proviso thereto he shall forthwith send a<\/p>\n
            copy thereof to his immediate official superior.”<\/p>\n
            “43.        Power of seizure and arrest in public place. —<\/p>\n
            Any officer of any of the department mentioned in Section<\/p>\n
            42 may —\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                          (a)       seize, in any public place or in<\/p>\n
                          transit, any narcotic drug or psychotropic<\/p>\n
                          substance in respect of which he has reason to<\/p>\n
                          believe an offence punishable under Chapter<\/p>\n
                          IV has been committed, and, along with such<\/p>\n
                          drug or substance, any animal or conveyance<\/p>\n
                          article liable to confiscation under this Act and
\n Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005                                  7<\/span><\/p>\n
                           any document or other article which he has<\/p>\n
                           reason to believe may furnish evidence of the<\/p>\n
                           commission of an offence punishable under<\/p>\n
                           Chapter IV relating to such drug or substance;<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                           (b)        detain and search any person whom<\/p>\n
                           he has reason to believe to have committed an<\/p>\n
                           offence punishable under Chapter IV, and if<\/p>\n
                           such person has any narcotic drug or<\/p>\n
                           psychotropic substance in his possession and<\/p>\n
                           such possession appears to him to be useful,<\/p>\n
                           arrest him and any other person in his<\/p>\n
                           company.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
9-A.      A conjoint reading of Sections 42 and 43 of the Act, shows that<\/p>\n
these sections are independent of each other. Section 43 authorises any<\/p>\n
Officer of the departments, mentioned in Section 42, to seize in any<\/p>\n
public place, or in transit, any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance, or<\/p>\n
controlled substance, in respect of which, he has reason to believe that an<\/p>\n
offence punishable under Chapter IV has been committed, whereas,<\/p>\n
Section 42 of the Act empowers the Officer to search any building, or<\/p>\n
conveyance, in any building, and seize the contraband, lying therein.<\/p>\n
When the information is with regard to concealment of some narcotic, in<\/p>\n
a vehicle, in transit, then the provisions of Section 43 of the Act are<\/p>\n
applicable. The word ‘public place’ has been explained for the purpose of<\/p>\n
Section 43 of the Act, which includes any public conveyance, hotel, shop<\/p>\n
or other places intended for use or accessible to the public.<\/p>\n
9-B.      A Division Bench of this Court in Dharminder Kumar Vs.
\n Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005                              8<\/span><\/p>\n
State of Punjab, 2002(4) RCR (Crl.)278 has held as under :-<\/p>\n
            “Thus it is evident that if seizure is made from any animal,<\/p>\n
            conveyance or article in a public place or in transit then<\/p>\n
            Section43 of the Act would be applicable. Section 43 and<\/p>\n
            Section 42 of the Act operate in different spheres. Since the<\/p>\n
            conveyance has been specifically included in Section 43 of<\/p>\n
            the Act also, therefore, the conveyance which is found in a<\/p>\n
            public place or in transit would be covered under the<\/p>\n
            provisions of Section 43 of the Act whereas conveyance used<\/p>\n
            in Section 42 of the Act has to be read as conveyance which<\/p>\n
            is other than a public place. This interpretation is the only<\/p>\n
            harmonious interpretation of Sections 42 and 43 of the Act.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          It is well settled principle of law, that the provisions of a<\/p>\n
Statute, are to be construed, in harmonious manner, so that none of the<\/p>\n
same is rendered nugatory. By harmonious construing the provisions of<\/p>\n
Sections 42 and 43 of the Act, it can be safely concluded, that if a<\/p>\n
conveyance is intercepted or apprehended at a public place, or in transit,<\/p>\n
then the provisions of Section 42 of the Act, would not be applicable.<\/p>\n
9-C.      It was held in State of Haryana Vs. Jarnail Singh and others<\/p>\n
2004(2) RCR (Crl.) 960 (SC) as under :-\n<\/p>\n
            “7. Section 43 of the NDPS Act provides that any officer of<\/p>\n
            any of the departments mentioned in Section 42 may seize in<\/p>\n
            any public place or in transit any narcotic drug or<\/p>\n
            psychotropic substance etc. in respect of which he has<\/p>\n
            reason to believe that an offence punishable under the Act<\/p>\n
            has been committed. He is also authorized to detain and
\n Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005                             9<\/span><\/p>\n
            search any person whom he has reason to believe to have<\/p>\n
            committed    an    offence    punishable   under   the   Act.<\/p>\n
            Explanation to Section 43 lays down that for the purposes of<\/p>\n
            this section, the expression “public place” includes any<\/p>\n
            public conveyance, hotel, shop, or other place intended for<\/p>\n
            use by, or accessible to the public.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            8. Sections 42 and 43, therefore, contemplate two difference<\/p>\n
            situations. Section 42 contemplates entry into and search of<\/p>\n
            any building, conveyance or enclosed place, while Section<\/p>\n
            43 contemplates a seizure made in any public place or in<\/p>\n
            transit. If seizure is made under Section 42 between sunset<\/p>\n
            and sunrise, the requirement of the proviso thereto has to be<\/p>\n
            complied with. There is no such proviso in Section 43 of the<\/p>\n
            Act and, therefore, it is obvious that if a public conveyance<\/p>\n
            is searched in a public place, the officer making the search<\/p>\n
            is not required to record his satisfaction as contemplated by<\/p>\n
            the proviso to Section 42 of the NDPS Act for searching the<\/p>\n
            vehicle between sunset and the sunrise.”<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
9-D.     In the instant case, Raghubir Singh, ASI, was present at Lali<\/p>\n
Mor, Ratia, in connection with patrol duty and crime checking, when he<\/p>\n
received an information from a special informer, that Mal Singh and<\/p>\n
Joginder Singh, accused, were indulging in the smuggling of poppy-husk,<\/p>\n
and will bring poppy-husk, in the car of Mal Singh, accused, bearing<\/p>\n
No.MAE\/1542. It was also informed that, they could be apprehended, if<\/p>\n
a raid was conducted. On receipt of this information, he informed Rajesh<\/p>\n
Kumar, Naib Tehsildar, and requested him to reach the spot. Thereafter,
\n Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005                               10<\/span><\/p>\n
he (Rajesh Kumar, Naib Tehsildar), reached the said place. It was, at that<\/p>\n
time, that the appellant was found driving the said car, in which 6 bags,<\/p>\n
containing poppy-husk, were lying. The recovery was effected from a<\/p>\n
vehicle, in transit, at a public place. Thus, the provisions of Section 43<\/p>\n
were applicable, and not the provisions of Section 42. In this view of the<\/p>\n
matter, the trial Court was right in holding that the question of<\/p>\n
compliance of the provisions of Section 42, did not at all arise, as the<\/p>\n
same were inapplicable. The trial Court was, thus, right in recording<\/p>\n
conviction, and awarding sentence, to the accused.\n<\/p>\n
10.       It was next submitted by the Counsel for the appellant, that<\/p>\n
only one sample was drawn, in stead of two samples, as per the<\/p>\n
requirement of law. The submission of the Counsel for the appellant, in<\/p>\n
this regard, does not appear to be correct. There is no requirement of law,<\/p>\n
that two samples from each of the bags of contraband, should be drawn,<\/p>\n
by the Investigating Officer, at the time of recovery.      The object of<\/p>\n
drawing a sample, is that the same should be sent to the Forensic Science<\/p>\n
Laboratory, for the purpose of analysis. The samples were sent to the<\/p>\n
Forensic Science Laboratory, and it found the contents thereof to be<\/p>\n
sufficient, for the purpose of analysis. There was, therefore, no violation<\/p>\n
of any provision of Act, or the Rules framed thereunder.          No dent,<\/p>\n
therefore, was caused, in the case of the prosecution, on account of<\/p>\n
drawing of one sample, from each of the bags. In this view of the matter,<\/p>\n
the submission of the Counsel for the appellant, being without merit,<\/p>\n
must fail, and the same stands rejected.\n<\/p>\n
11.       It was next submitted by the Counsel for the appellant, that<\/p>\n
some material contradictions, appeared in the statements of the witnesses,
\n Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005                               11<\/span><\/p>\n
which were not explained, and, as such, a serious doubt was cast on the<\/p>\n
prosecution story. According to the Counsel for the appellant, Raghubir<\/p>\n
Singh, SI (PW-6), the Investigating Officer, stated that the ruqa was sent<\/p>\n
through a Constable, who went on foot, and came back on scooter,<\/p>\n
whereas, Rajesh Kumar, Naib Tehsildar, (PW-7), stated that the ruqa was<\/p>\n
sent through a Constable, who went in Jeep, and came back, in jeep.<\/p>\n
Raghubir Singh, SI (PW-6), the Investigating Officer, stated that the<\/p>\n
writing work was done, while sitting in the jeep, whereas, Rajesh Kumar,<\/p>\n
(PW-7) stated that the writing work, was done, while sitting on the bridge<\/p>\n
of canal. Raghubir Singh, SI (PW-6), the Investigating Officer, stated<\/p>\n
that he tried to associate an independent witness, but none was ready,<\/p>\n
whereas, Rajesh Kumar (PW-7), stated that no attempt was made to join<\/p>\n
an independent witness. Raghubir Singh, SI (PW-6), the Investigating<\/p>\n
Officer, stated that after the recovery, the car was taken to the Police<\/p>\n
Station, by Mal Singh, accused, whereas, Rajesh Kumar (PW-7), stated<\/p>\n
that the car was brought to the Police Station, after having been driven by<\/p>\n
the police officials, after the recovery.    These contradictions, in the<\/p>\n
statements of the witnesses, cropped up, on account of lapse of time, and<\/p>\n
memory. It is not possible for a witness to remember the minute details<\/p>\n
of the case, even for a period of a few days. In the instant case, Raghubir<\/p>\n
Singh, SI (PW-6), the Investigating Officer, and Rajesh Kumar, Naib<\/p>\n
Tehsildar (PW-7), were examined on 23.10.2002, whereas, the recovery,<\/p>\n
in this case, was effected on 29.5.1999. It means that they were examined<\/p>\n
after more than 3 years of recovery. It was not at all possible for them, to<\/p>\n
remember all the minute details, for a period of more than 3 years. Even,<\/p>\n
these discrepancies cannot be said to be so serious, as to cast a cloud of
\n Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005                                  12<\/span><\/p>\n
doubt, on the prosecution story.      Occurrence of these discrepancies,<\/p>\n
clearly goes to show that the witnesses are truthful and not tutored. They<\/p>\n
could not be expected to make parrot like statements. In this view of the<\/p>\n
matter, the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, when scrutinized, as a<\/p>\n
whole, it becomes clear that the same is trustworthy, and reliable. These<\/p>\n
discrepancies, did not at all, cause any dent, in the prosecution story. In<\/p>\n
this view of the matter, the submission of the Counsel for the appellant,<\/p>\n
being without merit, must fail, and the same stands rejected.<\/p>\n
12.        No other point, was urged, by the Counsel for the parties.<\/p>\n
13.        In view of the above discussion, it is held that the judgment of<\/p>\n
conviction and the order of sentence, rendered by the trial Court, are<\/p>\n
based on the correct appreciation of evidence, and law, on the point. The<\/p>\n
same do not warrant any interference, and are liable to be upheld.<\/p>\n
14.        For the reasons recorded, hereinbefore, the appeal is dismissed.<\/p>\n
The judgment of conviction dated 11.3.2005, and the order of sentence<\/p>\n
dated 12.3.2005, are upheld. If the accused\/appellant is on bail, his bail<\/p>\n
bonds, shall stand cancelled. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Fatehabad,<\/p>\n
shall take necessary steps, to comply with the judgment, with due<\/p>\n
promptitude, keeping in view the applicability of the provisions of<\/p>\n
Section 428 of the Cr.P.C., and submit compliance report, to this Court,<\/p>\n
within a period of three months, from the date of receipt of a copy<\/p>\n
thereof.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
22.10.2008                                         (SHAM SUNDER)\nVimal                                                  JUDGE\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Mal Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 22 October, 2008 Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Appeal No.1100-SB of 2005 Date of Decision : 22.10.2008 Mal Singh S\/o Jagar Singh, ….Appellant resident of Rozawali. Versus The State of Haryana ….Respondent […]<\/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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-107957","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nMal Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 22 October, 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\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mal Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 22 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-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=\"2008-10-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-03-27T20:16:47+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=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mal Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 22 October, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-27T20:16:47+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008\"},\"wordCount\":3010,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008\",\"name\":\"Mal Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 22 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-10-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-27T20:16:47+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mal Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 22 October, 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":"Mal Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 22 October, 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\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mal Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 22 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-10-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-03-27T20:16:47+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":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mal Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 22 October, 2008","datePublished":"2008-10-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-27T20:16:47+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008"},"wordCount":3010,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008","name":"Mal Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 22 October, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-10-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-27T20:16:47+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mal-singh-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-22-october-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mal Singh vs The State Of Haryana on 22 October, 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\/107957","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=107957"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/107957\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=107957"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=107957"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=107957"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}