{"id":119582,"date":"2009-11-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2"},"modified":"2017-05-06T05:29:04","modified_gmt":"2017-05-05T23:59:04","slug":"state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2","title":{"rendered":"State Of Raj. &amp; Ors vs Bahadur Ram on 11 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Rajasthan High Court &#8211; Jodhpur<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">State Of Raj. &amp; Ors vs Bahadur Ram on 11 November, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>                                        1\n\n          <a href=\"\/doc\/907500\/\">D.B.CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL NO.02448\/2008\n\n                     State of Rajasthan &amp; Ors.\n                                v.\n                            Bahadur Ram\n\n      Date of Judgment<\/a>               ::      11th November, 2009\n\n               HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA\n              HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR\n\n\nMr. IS Pareek, Additional Government Counsel.\nMr. SK Poonia, for the respondent.\n                         ....\n\n\n\n            To       assail       validity,           correctness       and\n\npropriety of the judgment dated 1.11.2007, passed by\n\nlearned Single Judge, this appeal is preferred. The\n\nappeal is barred by limitation, thus, an application\n\nunder     Section     5     of    the       Limitation    Act     is    also\n\npreferred.\n\n\n\n            In brief, facts of the case are that the\n\nrespondent,      a    Constable       with      Rajasthan    Police     was\n\ncharged for an offence punishable under Sections 379\n\nand 411 IPC. For the same allegations he was also\n\ncharged for committing a misconduct as defined under\n\nRajasthan Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1971. The\n\nrespondent accordingly faced criminal trial as well as\n\nthe   disciplinary         proceedings        under   Rule   16    of   the\n\nRajasthan    Civil        Services      (Classification,        Control    &amp;\n\nAppeal)     Rules,        1958.      The      disciplinary      authority\n\ndismissed the respondent from service vide an order\n\ndated 28.2.1994 and that came to be affirmed by the\n\nappellate    authority        vide      order    dated   20.12.1994.       A\n                                    2\n\nreview petition preferred before the Governor too came\n\nto   be   rejected,      hence   the     respondent        preferred    a\n\npetition for writ before this Court and that came to\n\nbe accepted by the judgment impugned. Learned Single\n\nJudge, while setting aside the orders passed by the\n\ndisciplinary       authority,          appellate         authority    and\n\nreviewing authority, held that the delinquent employee\n\nwas honourably exonerated from the charges levelled\n\nagainst him, therefore, on basis of the same set of\n\nevidence   he   could     have   not      been     penalised     through\n\ndisciplinary action.\n\n\n\n           While       challenging      the     judgment     aforesaid,\n\ncontention of counsel for the appellant State is that\n\nstandard of proof required in              recording a finding of\n\nconviction    in   a    criminal       case    and   in    departmental\n\nproceedings are distinct and different. In a criminal\n\ncase it is essential to prove a charge beyond all\n\nreasonable      doubt,      whereas           in     a     departmental\n\nproceedings preponderance of probability would serve\n\nthe purpose and in the case in hand the disciplinary\n\nauthority on preponderance of probability reached at a\n\ndefinite     conclusion,     thus,       that      was     not   at    all\n\nwarranting interference of this Court under Article\n\n226 of the Constitution of India.\n\n\n\n           We have examined the judgment impugned and\n\nalso record of the case.\n                                      3\n\n               It is well settled that standard of proof\n\nrequired in recording a finding of conviction must be\n\nof strong nature to the extent that a charge must be\n\nproved    beyond      all    reasonable         doubts    whereas        in    a\n\ndepartmental       proceeding      preponderance          of   probability\n\nwould serve the purpose. If in a criminal trial the\n\ncourt concludes that the charge itself is not made\n\nout,    the     incident     alleged       is    absolutely        false      or\n\nconcocted then the departmental adjudicating authority\n\nmust not pass any order contrary, but in the case\n\nwhere a benefit of doubt is extended to the accused,\n\nthen while considering the allegation of misconduct\n\nthe departmental adjudicating authority can certainly\n\nexamine preponderance of probability and also reach at\n\na conclusion different to that of given by the court\n\nof criminal jurisdiction.\n\n\n\n               In the instant case learned Chief Judicial\n\nMagistrate by his judgment dated 20.5.1995 not only\n\nacquitted      the   respondent      but        also    gave   a   specific\n\nfinding that no case against him is made out for the\n\noffences punishable under Sections 420, 120-B IPC. As\n\nper    trial    court      there   was   no      evidence      against     the\n\naccused (the respondent) to establish the allegation\n\nof     forgery.      The     evidence      which        was    taken     into\n\nconsideration        by     the    trial        court    to    acquit         the\n\nrespondent        honourably       was     also        examined     by        the\n\ndisciplinary authority but he reached at a different\n\nconclusion, though that was prior to passing of the\n                                           4\n\norder of acquittal by the trial court. Hon'ble Supreme\n\nCourt    in   G.M.Tak          v.    State      of     Gujarat     and    others,\n\nreported      in     2006(5)        SCC       446,     held     that     where     a\n\nhonourable         acquittal        of     the       employee     is     made     by\n\ncompetent authority, then this fact is required to be\n\ntaken    into      consideration           in    the       proceedings     giving\n\nchallenge to the dismissal made as a consequent to\n\ndomestic inquiry for the same charge. In the present\n\ncase    the     disciplinary             as     well       as   the    appellate\n\nauthority passed their orders prior to acquittal made\n\nby     the    trial       court,          however,          before     reviewing\n\nauthority the respondent employee submitted a copy of\n\nthe judgment acquitting him and urged that his case is\n\nrequired      to    be    considered          by     keeping      in   mind      the\n\nfindings      given      by     the      trial       court.     The    reviewing\n\nauthority, thus, should have considered the findings\n\ngiven by the trial court which are as a matter of fact\n\nbased on same set of evidence on basis of which the\n\nemployee concerned was penalised with dismissal. The\n\nreviewing          authority             instead           of    taking         into\n\nconsideration the judgment passed by the trial court\n\nrejected the appeal simplicitor. Learned Single Judge\n\nconsidered this aspect of the matter and quashed the\n\norder    of     dismissal           as    that       was    contrary      to     the\n\nfindings      given      by     the      trial       court      acquitting       the\n\npetitioner and also holding that no charge at all is\n\nmade out against him. On examination of record, we are\n\nsatisfied that           the    respondent was              acquitted     by     the\n\ntrial court honourably with a definite finding that no\n                              5\n\ncharge of forgery is made out against him. It is also\n\nnoticed by us that the evidence available before the\n\ntrial court and the disciplinary authority during the\n\ncourse of inquiry were same. As such, we also find no\n\njustification   for     maintaining   dismissal   of   the\n\nrespondent employee.\n\n\n\n          In view of whatever discussed above, we are\n\nnot at all inclined to condone the delay in filing the\n\nappeal. Accordingly, the application as well as the\n\nappeal are dismissed.\n\n\n\n( GOVIND MATHUR ),J.                  ( A.M.KAPADIA ),J.\n<\/pre>\n<p>kkm\/ps.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Rajasthan High Court &#8211; Jodhpur State Of Raj. &amp; Ors vs Bahadur Ram on 11 November, 2009 1 D.B.CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL NO.02448\/2008 State of Rajasthan &amp; Ors. v. Bahadur Ram Date of Judgment :: 11th November, 2009 HON&#8217;BLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA HON&#8217;BLE MR.JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. IS Pareek, Additional Government Counsel. Mr. SK Poonia, for the [&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":[8,19],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-119582","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-rajasthan-high-court-jodhpur"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>State Of Raj. &amp; Ors vs Bahadur Ram on 11 November, 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\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of Raj. &amp; Ors vs Bahadur Ram on 11 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2\" \/>\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=\"2009-11-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-05-05T23:59:04+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of Raj. &amp; Ors vs Bahadur Ram on 11 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-05T23:59:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2\"},\"wordCount\":27,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2\",\"name\":\"State Of Raj. &amp; Ors vs Bahadur Ram on 11 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-05-05T23:59:04+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of Raj. &amp; Ors vs Bahadur Ram on 11 November, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"State Of Raj. &amp; Ors vs Bahadur Ram on 11 November, 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\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of Raj. &amp; Ors vs Bahadur Ram on 11 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-05-05T23:59:04+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of Raj. &amp; Ors vs Bahadur Ram on 11 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-05T23:59:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2"},"wordCount":27,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2","name":"State Of Raj. &amp; Ors vs Bahadur Ram on 11 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-05-05T23:59:04+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-raj-ors-vs-bahadur-ram-on-11-november-2009-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of Raj. &amp; Ors vs Bahadur Ram on 11 November, 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:\/\/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\/119582","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=119582"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/119582\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=119582"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=119582"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=119582"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}