{"id":109883,"date":"1966-12-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1966-12-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966"},"modified":"2016-02-23T17:15:12","modified_gmt":"2016-02-23T11:45:12","slug":"h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966","title":{"rendered":"H. A. K. Rao, Chartered Accountant vs Council Of Institute Of Chartered &#8230; on 13 December, 1966"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">H. A. K. Rao, Chartered Accountant vs Council Of Institute Of Chartered &#8230; on 13 December, 1966<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1967 AIR 1257, \t\t  1967 SCR  (2) 256<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: K S Rao<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Rao, K. Subba (Cj)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nH. A. K. RAO, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nCOUNCIL OF INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA,\t NEW\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n13\/12\/1966\n\nBENCH:\nRAO, K. SUBBA (CJ)\nBENCH:\nRAO, K. SUBBA (CJ)\nSHAH, J.C.\nSIKRI, S.M.\nRAMASWAMI, V.\nVAIDYIALINGAM, C.A.\n\nCITATION:\n 1967 AIR 1257\t\t  1967 SCR  (2) 256\n\n\nACT:\n     Chartered\tAccountants Act 1949--Clause (ii), Part\t II,\nSecond\tSchedule--Council's  power  to specify\tany  act  or\nomission  other than those covered by Act or Regulations  as\n'professional misconduct'--scope of.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n     The Council of the Institute of Chartered\tAccountants,\nby  a notification issued on February 22, 1964, in  exercise\nof  powers  conferred by cl. (ii) of Part 11 of\t the  Second\nSchedule  to the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949,  notified,\ninter  alia, that a member of the Institute shall be  deemed\nto be guilty of misconduct if, in connection with  elections\nto the Councils of the lnstitute., he took part directly  or\nindirectly  in\t(1) issuing manifestoes\t or  circulars;\t (2)\ncanvassing votes by visiting places of business or residence\nof the voters or in any other manner.\nThe appellant, who was a prospective candidate for  election\nto  the\t Central  Council of the  Institute,  filed  a\twrit\npetition to quash the notification.  It was contended on his\nbehalf that the power of the Council to issue a notification\nis limited by the express provisions of cl. (ii) of Part  II\nof  the\t Second\t Schedule to the Act.\tUnder  cl.  (i)\t any\ncontravention  of  the\tprovisions  of the  Act\t or  of\t the\nRegulations  made  thereunder was  professional\t misconduct;\ntherefore the expression \"other act or omission\" in cl. (ii)\nmust  be an act or omission other than those covered by\t the\nAct  or the Regulations.  Under cl. (2) of Regulation  54-A,\nundue influence by interfering with the free exercise of any\nelectoral rights was misconduct, but the proviso to cl.\t (2)\nwhich  permitted a declaration of policy or a promise  of  a\nparticular  action  saved  the issuing\tof  manifestoes\t and\ncirculars from the operation of the substantive part of\t the\nclause.\t The appellant therefore claimed that he had a legal\nright  to issue circulars or manifestoes within the  meaning\nof  the proviso and that the impugned notification being  in\nderogation of the Regulation, was illegal.\nIt   was  further  contended  that  the\t  notification\t was\ninconsistent  with cl. (4B) of Regulation 54A, because\tthat\nclause\tonly  prohibited  canvassing  for  votes  within   a\ndistance  of  200 meters from the  polling  booths,  thereby\nimpiedly  permitting  canvassing beyond that  distance;\t cf.\n(4B) detracted only to a limited extent from the legal right\nto  canvass  and  the  impugned\t notification  containing  a\nprohibition  against general canvassing beyond these  limits\ncontravened both cl. (2) and cl. (4B) of Regulation 54-A and\nwas therefore bad.\nThe High Court held that the impugned notification in so far\nas it directed that the issuing of manifestoes or  circulars\nwas  misconduct,  was illegal; but that the rest of  it\t was\nvalid.\tOn appeal to this Court by the appellant and upon  a\ncross-appeal by the respondent.\nHELD: The entire notification was valid.\nAlthough the act of issuing a manifesto or a circular  would\nnot  amount to undue influence by virtue of the\t proviso  to\nRegulation 54-A(2) such\n\t\t\t    257\nact was constituted by the notification a different head  of\nprofessional misconduct which the Council was authorised  to\ndo  under cl. (ii) of Part II of the Second Schedule to\t the\nAct. [263 H]\nThe  Council  had  the\tpower  to  issue  the\tnotification\nprohibiting canvassing of votes and the notification was not\ninconsistent  with either the provisions of the Act  or\t the\nRegulations. [263 F]\nWhile  the Regulations provide for disciplinary\t action\t for\nundue  influence  and  for canvassing  for  votes  within  a\ndistance   of\t200  meters  from  a  polling\tbooth,\t the\nnotification placed other acts and omissions under different\nheads of misconduct.  There is no inherent conflict  between\nundue influence, canvassing of votes by visiting the  places\nof  business or the residence of the voters, and  canvassing\nwithin\ta distance of 200 metres from a polling booth.\t All\nthe three can stand together. [262 H]\nThe  appellant did not have any unlimited right\t to  canvass\nfor  vote  either statutory or otherwise.  His\trights\twere\ndefined by the statute and it could not be said that such an\nunlimited right to canvass is implicit in the right to stand\nfor election. [263 B]\nThe  electorate\t was an enlightened body and  the  elections\nwere to a council designed to maintain high standards of the\nprofession.   Canvassing may be necessary for explaining  to\nan  illiterate voter the qualifications of a  candidate\t and\nthe principles for which he stands or in the case of a\tvast\nelectorate with which the candidate may not be familiar, but\nno  such necessity exists in the case of enlightened  voters\nof  a compact electorate The impugned notification  was\t not\ntherefore  unreasonable\t in  the sense\tthat  expression  is\nunderstood in law. [263 C]\n[The  question\twhether the notification  was  violative  of\nArticle\t 19  of the Constitution and  whether  that  Article\ncould  be invoked notwithstanding the fact that a  state  of\nemergency was in force, was left open.] [259 A-B]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeals Nos.  447\t and<br \/>\n501 of 1965.\n<\/p>\n<p>Appeals\t by special leave from the judgment and order  dated<br \/>\nJuly  2, 1964 of the Mysore High Court in Writ Petition\t No.<br \/>\n473 of 1964.\n<\/p>\n<p>K.   Srinivasan and R. Gopalakrishnan, for the appellant (in<br \/>\nC  A. No. 447 of 1965) and the respondent (in C. A. No.\t 501<br \/>\nof 1965).\n<\/p>\n<p>M.   C.\t Setalvad,  K.\tK.  Jain and H.\t K.  Puri,  for\t the<br \/>\nrespondent (in C. A. No. 447 of 1965) and the appellant\t (in<br \/>\nC. A. No. 501 of 1965).\n<\/p>\n<p>The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\nSubba Rao, C. J. These are cross-appeals-the appeal has been<br \/>\nfiled  by  H.  A. K. Rao, a Chartered  Accountant,  and\t the<br \/>\ncross-appeal  has  been\t filed by  the\trespondent  therein-<br \/>\nagainst\t the  judgment and order of the\t Mysore\t High  Court<br \/>\npassed in Writ Petition No. 473 of 1964 filed by the  former<br \/>\nchallenging  the validity of the notification issued by\t the<br \/>\nlatter\tregulating the conduct of elections to\tthe  Central<br \/>\nCouncil\t and  the  Regional Councils  of  the  Institute  of<br \/>\nChartered Accountants of India.\n<\/p>\n<p>M1Sup.CI\/67-3<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">258<\/span><br \/>\nThe  facts  are\t not in dispute and,  they  may\t be  briefly<br \/>\nstated, H. A., K. Rao, the appellant in Civil Appeal No. 447<br \/>\nof  1965, is a chartered accountant by profession and  is  a<br \/>\nfellow\tmember of the Institute of Chartered Accountants  of<br \/>\nIndia,\thereinafter  referred to as  the  &#8220;Institute&#8221;.\t The<br \/>\nelection to the Central Council and the Regional Councils of<br \/>\nthe  Institute\twas to take place in the  month\t of  August,<br \/>\n1964.  On February 22, 1964, the President of the  Institute<br \/>\nissued a notification in exercise of the powers conferred by<br \/>\ncl. (ii) of Part 11 of the Second Schedule to The  Chartered<br \/>\nAccountants  Act, 1949 (38 of 1949), hereinafter called\t the<br \/>\nAct,  notifying\t that  a member of the\tInstitute  shall  be<br \/>\ndeemed\tto be guilty of misconduct, if, in  connection\twith<br \/>\nelection  to the Councils of the Institute, he was found  to<br \/>\nhave  taken part, directly or indirectly, either himself  or<br \/>\nthrough\t  any  other  person,  in  any\tof   the   following<br \/>\nactivities:-(I)\t  issuing  manifestoes\tor  circulars;\t (2)<br \/>\ncanvassing votes by visiting places of business or residence<br \/>\nof  the\t voters or in any other manner; and  (3)  organising<br \/>\nparties to entertain voters.  The appellant in Civil  Appeal<br \/>\nNo. 447 of 1965 was a prospective candidate for the  Central<br \/>\nCouncil\t of  the  Institute.  He filed\tthe  aforesaid\twrit<br \/>\npetition to quash the said notification on various  grounds,<br \/>\nwhich  we will consider in the course of the judgment.\t The<br \/>\nHigh Court held that the impugned notification, in so far as<br \/>\nit  directed  that issuing of manifestoes or  circulars\t was<br \/>\nmisconduct   was   illegal  and\t that  that  part   of\t the<br \/>\nnotification  in so far as it directed canvassing  of  votes<br \/>\nwas misconduct was valid.  Both the parties are\t challenging<br \/>\nthe said order in so far as it is against each of them.<br \/>\nMr.  K.\t Srinivasan, learned counsel for  the  appellant  in<br \/>\nCivil Appeal No. 447 of 1965, attacked the validity of.\t the<br \/>\nnotification on three grounds, namely, (1) it was beyond the<br \/>\ncompetence of the Central Council, (2) it purported to amend<br \/>\nthe   Regulations,   (3)  it  was  in  conflict\t  with\t the<br \/>\nRegulations, and (4) it was in violation of cls. (1)(a)\t and<br \/>\n(1)(g) of Art. 19 of the Constitution.\n<\/p>\n<p>,Mr.  M. C. Setalvad, appearing for the Institute, canvassed<br \/>\nthe correctness of the order of the High Court in so far  as<br \/>\nit  held that the issuing of manifestoes and  circulars\t was<br \/>\nillegal.   He contended that the impugned  notification\t was<br \/>\nwell  within the competence of the Institute and was not  in<br \/>\nconflict  with any of the Regulations, but it was really  an<br \/>\nadditional  head  of  disqualification\tintroduced  by\t the<br \/>\nInstitute in the interests of maintaining high standards  in<br \/>\nthe profession.\n<\/p>\n<p>At  the\t outset it may be mentioned that  the  appellant  in<br \/>\nCivil  Appeal  No. 447 of 1965 did not seek to\tsustain\t his<br \/>\nclaim  on the basis of his fundamental right  presumably  in<br \/>\nview  of  the fact that its operation was and  is  suspended<br \/>\nunder  Art.  358 of the Constitution during  the  emergency,<br \/>\nthough\the  sought to draw an anology on the  provisions  of<br \/>\nArt. 19 and the decisions thereon in support<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">\t\t\t    259<\/span><br \/>\nof  his\t contentions.\tWe do not  propose  to\texpress\t any<br \/>\nopinion\t either\t on  the question whether  Art.\t 19  of\t the<br \/>\nConstitution   can   be\t  invoked  in\tthe   instant\tcase<br \/>\nnotwithstanding\t the fact that the state of emergency is  in<br \/>\nforce  or on the question whether the Institute is  a  State<br \/>\nwithin\tthe meaning of Art. 12 of the Constitution.  We\t put<br \/>\naside Art. 19 altogether, as the appellant did not rely upon<br \/>\nit and proceed to consider his other arguments..<br \/>\nBefore we consider the relevant provisions of the Act it  is<br \/>\nnecessary to notice at the outset the nature and the objects<br \/>\nof the Institute.  The Institute is a statutory body  having<br \/>\nperpetual  successION and a common seal.  It is governed  by<br \/>\nthe  Act  and the Chartered Accountants\t Regulations,  1949,<br \/>\nhereinafter called the Regulations.  The Central Council  of<br \/>\nthe Institute shall be composed of not more than 24  members<br \/>\nelected\t by  the  members of the Institute  from  among\t the<br \/>\nfellows\t thereof  and  6 persons nominated  by\tthe  Central<br \/>\nGovernment.   There are Regional Councils which function  in<br \/>\ntheir respective regions subject to the control, supervision<br \/>\nand  direction\tof  the\t Central  Council  or  any  of\t its<br \/>\ncommittees.   Elections\t to the Councils are  held  once  in<br \/>\nthree  years.  Therefore, the Act, through  its\t provisions,<br \/>\nregulates  the\tprofession  of\tchartered  accountants.\t  It<br \/>\nestablishes  an\t Institute  of\tChartered  Accountants\t and<br \/>\nprovides for the constitution of a Council for carrying\t out<br \/>\nthe objects of the Act.\t The Central Council,inter alia, has<br \/>\nthe  power  to\tadmit  members to  the\tInstitute,  to\ttake<br \/>\ndisciplinary action, and to regulate and maintain the status<br \/>\nand  standard  of  the professional  qualifications  of\t the<br \/>\nmembers\t of the Institute.  It is needless to say  that\t the<br \/>\nprofession of chartered accountant is a respectable one\t and<br \/>\nthe   duties  of  chartered  accountants  are  onerous\t and<br \/>\nresponsible.  They are all educated and qualified men and on<br \/>\ntheir efficiency and integrity depends the stability of many<br \/>\nof  the institutions in the country.  It cannot,  therefore,<br \/>\nbe gainsaid that the candidates seeking to become members of<br \/>\nthe  said Council which regulates the conduct of  chartered<br \/>\naccountants  shall necessarily be persons of high  integrity<br \/>\nand above criticism.\n<\/p>\n<p>With  this background we shall now proceed to  consider\t the<br \/>\narguments raised in the appeals.\n<\/p>\n<p>To appreciate the contentions of the parties it will be con-<br \/>\nvenient\t to collect at one place the relevant provisions  of<br \/>\nthe Act and the Regulations.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Act<br \/>\n\t       .Section\t 22.  For the purpose of  this\tAct,<br \/>\n\t      the expression professional misconduct&#8221;  shall<br \/>\n\t      be  deemed  to include any  ,act\tor  omission<br \/>\n\t      specified in any of the Schedules, but nothing<br \/>\n\t      in  this section shall be construed  to  limit<br \/>\n\t      or .abridge in any way the power conferred  or<br \/>\n\t      duty cast on<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">260<\/span><br \/>\n\t       the Council under sub-section (1) of  section<br \/>\n\t      21  to inquire into the conduct of any  member<br \/>\n\t      of    the\t   Institute   under\tany    other<br \/>\n\t      circumstances.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t       Section\t 30  (1).   The\t Council   may,\t  by<br \/>\n\t      notification  in\tthe Gazette of\tIndia,\tmake<br \/>\n\t      regulations  for the purpose of  carrying\t out<br \/>\n\t      the  objects of this Act, and a copy  of\tsuch<br \/>\n\t      regulations  shall be sent to each  member  of<br \/>\n\t      the Institute.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t       (2)  In particular, and without prejudice  to<br \/>\n\t      the  generality of the foregoing\tpower,\tsuch<br \/>\n\t      regulations may provide for all or any of\t the<br \/>\n\t      following matters\n<\/p>\n<p>\t       (b)  the\t manner\t in which elections  to\t the<br \/>\n\t      Council and the Regional Councils may be held.<br \/>\n\t\t    THE SECOND SCHEDULE<br \/>\n\t\t\t   Part I<br \/>\n\t       A  chartered accountant in practice shall  be<br \/>\n\t      deemed   to   be\t guilty\t  of\tprofessional<br \/>\n\t      misconduct, if he-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t       Clauses (1) to (10)<br \/>\n\t\t\t  Part II<br \/>\n\t       A   member  of  the  Institute,\twhether\t  in<br \/>\n\t      practice or not, shall be deemed to be  guilty<br \/>\n\t      of professional misconduct, if he-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t       (i)  contravenes\t any  of the  provisions  of<br \/>\n\t      this Act or the regulations made thereunder.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t       (ii) is guilty of such other act or  omission<br \/>\n\t      as  may  be specified by the Council  in\tthis<br \/>\n\t      behalf,  by  notification in  the\t Gazette  of<br \/>\n\t      India.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t       Regulation 54-A.\t Disciplinary action against<br \/>\n\t      member in connection with conduct of  election<br \/>\n\t      :\n<\/p>\n<p>\t       A member of the Institute shall be liable for<br \/>\n\t      disciplinary  action  by\tthe  Council  if  he<br \/>\n\t      adopts one or more of the following  practices<br \/>\n\t      with  regard to the election to  the  Council,<br \/>\n\t      namely<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">\t       (1)<\/span><br \/>\n\t       (2)  Undue  influence,  that is to  say,\t any<br \/>\n\t      direct or indirect interference or attempt  to<br \/>\n\t      interfere on the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">\t\t\t    261<\/span><br \/>\n\t       part  of a candidate or of any  other  person<br \/>\n\t      with the connivance of the candidate, with the<br \/>\n\t      free exercise of any electoral right ;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t       Provided that-\n<\/p>\n<p>\t       A  declaration  of policy or a promise  of  a<br \/>\n\t      particular  action, or the mere exercise of  a<br \/>\n\t      legal  right without intent to interfere\twith<br \/>\n\t      an electoral right, shall not be deemed to  be<br \/>\n\t      interference   within  the  meaning  of\tthis<br \/>\n\t      clause.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t       (4B).\tThe   canvassing   for\t votes,\t  or<br \/>\n\t      soliciting   the\tvote  of  any  elector,\t  or<br \/>\n\t      persuading  any elector not to vote,  for\t any<br \/>\n\t      particular   candidate,  or   persuading\t any<br \/>\n\t      elector  not  to\tvote  at  the  election,  or<br \/>\n\t      exhibiting  any  notice or sign  board  (other<br \/>\n\t      than  an\tofficial  notice)  relating  to\t the<br \/>\n\t      election,\t by  a\tcandidate or  by  any  other<br \/>\n\t      person  with  the connivance  of\ta  candidate<br \/>\n\t      within a distance of 200 meters from a polling<br \/>\n\t      booth.\n<\/p>\n<p>In exercise of the power conferred under cl. (ii) of Part 11<br \/>\nof the Second Schedule to the Act, on February 22, 1964, the<br \/>\nCouncil issued the following notification :\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t       &#8230;&#8230;  a  member of the Institute  shall  be<br \/>\n\t      deemed   to   be\t guilty\t  of\tprofessional<br \/>\n\t      misconduct, if in connection with election  to<br \/>\n\t      the  Central Council and\/or Regional  Councils<br \/>\n\t      of  the Institute, he is found to\t have  taken<br \/>\n\t      part,  directly or indirectly, either  himself<br \/>\n\t      or  through  any other person, in any  of\t the<br \/>\n\t      following activities :-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t       (i)  issuing manifestoes or circulars.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t       (ii)  canvassing votes by visiting places  of<br \/>\n\t      business\tor residence of voters in any  other<br \/>\n\t      manner; and\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t       (iii) organising parties to entertain voters.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The gist of the said provisions may be stated thus : For the<br \/>\npurpose of the Act the expression &#8220;professional\t misconduct&#8221;<br \/>\nincludes  the act or omission specified in the\tSchedule  to<br \/>\nthe  Act.   The\t Council  also\tmay  by\t notification\tmake<br \/>\nregulations  in\t connection with the conduct  of  elections.<br \/>\nUnder Regulation 54-A(2) and (4B) a member of the  Institute<br \/>\nshall be liable to disciplinary action by the Council if  he<br \/>\nwas guilty of the practice, among others, of undue influence<br \/>\nand  canvassing as defined therein.  On February  22,  1964.<br \/>\nthe  Council issued a notification specifying that a  member<br \/>\nof the Institute shall be deemed to be guilty of misconduct,<br \/>\nif,  in connection with the election to the Councils of\t the<br \/>\nInstitute,  he\tis  found to have taken\t part,\tdirectly  or<br \/>\nindirectly, either himself or<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">262<\/span><br \/>\nthrough any. other person, or to have issued manifestoes  or<br \/>\ncirculars  or to have canvassed votes by visiting places  of<br \/>\nbusiness.  or residence, of voters or in any  other  manner.<br \/>\nPart I of the Second Schedule to the Act describes the\tacts<br \/>\nof   professional  misconduct  in  relation   to   chartered<br \/>\naccountants  in practice requiring action by the High  Court<br \/>\nand  Part II thereof states, generally that a member of\t the<br \/>\nInstitute.&#8217;  whether in practice or not, shall be deemed  to<br \/>\nbe guilty of professional misconduct, if&#8217; he contravenes any<br \/>\nof the provisions of the Act or the Regulations or is guilty<br \/>\nof  such  other act or omission as may be specified  by\t the<br \/>\nCouncil\t in this behalf, by notification in the\t Gazette  of<br \/>\nIndia.\n<\/p>\n<p>  Now the question is whether the said\tnotification<br \/>\nis  invalid for any of the reasons mentioned above.   It  is<br \/>\nsaid  that the power of the Council to issue a\tnotification<br \/>\nis limited by the express provisions of cl. (ii) of Part  11<br \/>\nof the Second Schedule to the Act.  As under cl. (i) of Part<br \/>\n11 of the.  Second Schedule to the Act, the contravention of<br \/>\nthe  provisions\t of  the  Act or  of  the  Regulations\tmade<br \/>\nthereunder   was  professional\tmisconduct,   the   argument<br \/>\nproceeded,  the\t expression &#8220;other act or omission&#8221;  in\t cl.\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii)  should  be  an  act or-  omission\t other\tthan  those-<br \/>\nprovided  in the Regulations.  Elaborating this argument  it<br \/>\nwas  said  that under Regulation 54-A(2)  the  appellant  in<br \/>\nCivil  Appeal No. 447 of 1965 had a legal right\t to  canvass<br \/>\nwithin\tthe meaning of the said proviso, that the  notifica-<br \/>\ntion in effect depriving him of that right was in derogation<br \/>\nof the the said Regulation and, was, therefore, illegal.  It<br \/>\nwas also argued that the said notification was\tinconsistent<br \/>\nwith  cl.(4B)  of  Regulation  54A,  as\t under\tthat  clause<br \/>\ncanvassing  for\t votes or soliciting votes of  electors\t was<br \/>\nprohibited within a distance of 200 meters from the  polling<br \/>\nbooths, thereby impliedly permitting canvassing beyond\tthat<br \/>\ndistance, and that, therefore, the notification\t prohibiting<br \/>\ncanvassing  generally was in direct conflict with the  same.<br \/>\nThe  further argument was that cl. (4B) of  Regulation\t54-A<br \/>\ndetracted  only to a limited extent from the legal right  to<br \/>\ncanvass and that any prohibition against general  canvassing<br \/>\nbeyond\tthe limits laid down by cl. (4B) of Regulation\t54-A<br \/>\ncontravened both cl. (2) and cl. (4B) of Regulation 54-A and<br \/>\nwas bad.\n<\/p>\n<p>The argument at first sight appears to be attractive, but it<br \/>\ninvolves  a fallacy.  The Regulations  enumerated  different<br \/>\nheads for disciplinary action in connection with the conduct<br \/>\nof  an\telection; but they did not, either expressly  or  by<br \/>\nnecessary  implication,\t prohibit the  Council\tfrom  adding<br \/>\nadditional   heads  of\tdisciplinary  action.\t While\t the<br \/>\nRegulations  provide  for  disciplinary\t action\t for   undue<br \/>\ninfluence  and\tfor  canvassing\t for  votes  etc.  within  a<br \/>\ndistance   of\t200  metres  from  a  polling\tbooth,\t the<br \/>\nnotification placed other acts and omissions under different<br \/>\nheads of misconduct.  There is no inherent conflict  between<br \/>\nundue  influence  and canvasisng of votes  by  visiting\t the<br \/>\nplaces of business or the residence of the voters.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">\t\t\t    263<\/span><\/p>\n<p>So  took  there is no conflict between canvassing  of  votes<br \/>\nwithin.\t a distance of 200 meters from a polling  booth\t and<br \/>\ncanvassing  of\tvotes  by visiting  places  of\tbusiness  or<br \/>\nresidence  of voters or in any other manner.  All the  three<br \/>\ncan stand together.\n<\/p>\n<p>Nor  can  we agree that apart from the\tfundamental  rights,<br \/>\nwhich the appellant does not claim in this appeal, he has an<br \/>\nunlimited  right to canvass for votes, either  statutory  or<br \/>\notherwise.  Nothing has been placed before us to sustain any<br \/>\nsuch  right.  His rights are defined by the statute  and  we<br \/>\ncannot\tsay  that  such an unlimited  right  to\t canvass  is<br \/>\nimplicit in the right to stand for election.<br \/>\nWe  cannot  also  agree with the  learned  counsel  for\t the<br \/>\nappellant that the notification is unreasonable in the sense<br \/>\nthat  expression is understood in law.\tAs noticed  earlier,<br \/>\nthe electorate is art enlightened body and the elections are<br \/>\nto  a  council designed to maintain high  standards  of\t the<br \/>\nprofession.    The   voters  are  expected   to\t  know\t the<br \/>\nqualifications of every candidate and they are certainly  in<br \/>\na ,position to vote for the best candidate.  Canvassing\t may<br \/>\nbe  necessary  for  explaining to an  illiterate  voter\t the<br \/>\nqualifications\tof a candidate and the principles for  which<br \/>\nhe  stands  or in the case of vast electorate to  which\t the<br \/>\ncandidate may not be familiar, but no such necessity  exists<br \/>\nin  the case of enlightened voters of a compact\t electorate.<br \/>\nIf  the Council thought that malpractices existed and  undue<br \/>\nand unwholesome pressures were brought to bear on the voters<br \/>\nand  for that reason, with a view to purify the\t conduct  of<br \/>\nelections,  if it issued the said  notification\t prohibiting<br \/>\ncanvassing,   we   cannot  say\tthat   the   Council   acted<br \/>\nunreasonably  in issuing the said notification.\t  It  issued<br \/>\nthe notification in the best interests of the purity of\t the<br \/>\nelections and ultimately in the interests of the  profession<br \/>\nitself.\t  We, therefore, hold that the Council had not\tonly<br \/>\npower  to issue the notification prohibiting  canvassing  of<br \/>\nvotes\tbut  also  that\t the  said  notification   was\t not<br \/>\ninconsistent  with either the provisions of the Act  or\t the<br \/>\nRegulations made thereunder.\n<\/p>\n<p>Now  coming  to the cross-appeal, the High Court  held\tthat<br \/>\nissuing\t illegible  manifestoes or circulars  directly\tcame<br \/>\ninto conflict with the proviso to cl. (2) of Regulation 54-A<br \/>\nwhich  says that a declaration of policy or a promise  of  a<br \/>\nparticular  action,  or the mere exercise of a\tlegal  right<br \/>\nwithout\t intent to interfere with an electoral right,  shall<br \/>\nnot  be deemed to be interference within the meaning of\t the<br \/>\nsaid  clause.  Doubtless the proviso to\t Regulation  54-A(2)<br \/>\nsaves\tissuing\t of  manifestoes  and  circulars  from\t the<br \/>\noperation of the substantive part of the clause.  The act of<br \/>\nissuing\t a  manifesto  or a circular,  therefore,  does\t not<br \/>\namount\tto  undue  influence with in  the  meaning  of\tthat<br \/>\nclause.\t  If  the  notification says that  such\t issuing  of<br \/>\nmanifestoes  or circulars is undue influence,  it  certainly<br \/>\ncomes into conflict with that clause.  But the\tnotification<br \/>\ndoes  not,  and indeed it cannot, amend\t the  definition  of<br \/>\n&#8220;undue influence&#8221;.  The<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">264<\/span><br \/>\nsaid  Act, though it does not amount to an undue  influence,<br \/>\nis  constituted a different head of professional  misconduct<br \/>\nwhich the Council is authorized to do under cl. (ii) of Part<br \/>\n11 of the Second Schedule to the Act.  From this perspective<br \/>\nno  conflict between the two arises.  We cannot,  therefore,<br \/>\nagree  with  the  reasoning  of\t the  High  Court  that\t the<br \/>\nnotification   in  so  far  as\tit  prohibited\tissuing\t  of<br \/>\nmanifestoes and circulars was illegal.<br \/>\nIn  the\t result,  we hold that the  entire  notification  is<br \/>\nvalid.\tCivil Appeal No. 447 of 1965 is dismissed with costs<br \/>\nand  Civil  Appeal No. 501 of 1965 is allowed, but,  in\t the<br \/>\ncircumstances, without costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>R.K.P.S.\t\t\tC. A. 447 of 1965 dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t      C.   A. 501 of 1965 allowed.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">265<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India H. A. K. Rao, Chartered Accountant vs Council Of Institute Of Chartered &#8230; on 13 December, 1966 Equivalent citations: 1967 AIR 1257, 1967 SCR (2) 256 Author: K S Rao Bench: Rao, K. Subba (Cj) PETITIONER: H. A. K. RAO, CHARTERED ACCOUNTANT Vs. RESPONDENT: COUNCIL OF INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-109883","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>H. A. K. Rao, Chartered Accountant vs Council Of Institute Of Chartered ... on 13 December, 1966 - 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\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"H. A. K. Rao, Chartered Accountant vs Council Of Institute Of Chartered ... on 13 December, 1966 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966\" \/>\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=\"1966-12-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-02-23T11:45:12+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=\"19 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"H. A. K. Rao, Chartered Accountant vs Council Of Institute Of Chartered &#8230; on 13 December, 1966\",\"datePublished\":\"1966-12-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-23T11:45:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966\"},\"wordCount\":2902,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966\",\"name\":\"H. A. K. Rao, Chartered Accountant vs Council Of Institute Of Chartered ... on 13 December, 1966 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1966-12-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-02-23T11:45:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"H. A. K. Rao, Chartered Accountant vs Council Of Institute Of Chartered &#8230; on 13 December, 1966\"}]},{\"@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":"H. A. K. Rao, Chartered Accountant vs Council Of Institute Of Chartered ... on 13 December, 1966 - 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\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"H. A. K. Rao, Chartered Accountant vs Council Of Institute Of Chartered ... on 13 December, 1966 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1966-12-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-02-23T11:45:12+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":"19 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"H. A. K. Rao, Chartered Accountant vs Council Of Institute Of Chartered &#8230; on 13 December, 1966","datePublished":"1966-12-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-23T11:45:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966"},"wordCount":2902,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966","name":"H. A. K. Rao, Chartered Accountant vs Council Of Institute Of Chartered ... on 13 December, 1966 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1966-12-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-02-23T11:45:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/h-a-k-rao-chartered-accountant-vs-council-of-institute-of-chartered-on-13-december-1966#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"H. A. K. Rao, Chartered Accountant vs Council Of Institute Of Chartered &#8230; on 13 December, 1966"}]},{"@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\/109883","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=109883"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/109883\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=109883"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=109883"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=109883"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}