{"id":123147,"date":"2002-05-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-05-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002"},"modified":"2017-03-11T21:37:39","modified_gmt":"2017-03-11T16:07:39","slug":"sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002","title":{"rendered":"Sescerrevtiacreys,, &#8230; vs Sahngoo Ram Arya &amp; Anr on 7 May, 2002"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sescerrevtiacreys,, &#8230; vs Sahngoo Ram Arya &amp; Anr on 7 May, 2002<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S Hegde<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: N. Santosh Hegde, Shivaraj V. Patil<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil) 3358-3359  of  2002\n\n\n\nPETITIONER:\nSESCERREVTIACREYS,, MUI.NPO.R&amp;IRORRISG.ATION &amp; RURAL ENGG.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSAHNGOO RAM ARYA &amp; ANR.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t07\/05\/2002\n\nBENCH:\nN. Santosh Hegde &amp; Shivaraj V. Patil\n\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>(With CA Nos. 3352-3357\/2002 @ SLP  Nos.5097-5102\/2001 &amp;   SLP\tNos.16496-97 of 2001)<\/p>\n<p>J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n<p>SANTOSH HEGDE, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>SLP  Nos.6126-27\/2001 :\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLeave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThese two appeals arise out of an order made by the High<br \/>\nCourt of Judicature at Allahabad dated 16.3.2001 in Civil Misc.<br \/>\nW.P. Nos.24759 and 28512 of 1999. The original writ<br \/>\npetitioner had filed a number of writ petitions challenging the<br \/>\nvarious actions taken by the Department against him. In the said<br \/>\nwrit petitions he had made very serious allegations against Sri<br \/>\nMarkandey Chand who was then the Minister for Minor<br \/>\nIrrigation and Rural Engineering Services in the Government of<br \/>\nU.P. It is seen from the record\t that the said Minister had filed a<br \/>\ncounter affidavit denying the allegations levelled against him.<br \/>\nIn the said writ petitions, originally the High Court had passed<br \/>\ncertain interim orders staying the action initiated by the<br \/>\nDepartment against which the Department had filed SLPs<br \/>\nbefore this Court which challenge was allowed and this Court<br \/>\nas per its order dated 3.4.2000 while directing the parties to<br \/>\nmaintain status quo as on the date of the said order, requested<br \/>\nthe High Court to hear and dispose of all the writ petitions<br \/>\nwithin a period of 6 months from that date. After  the said order<br \/>\nof this Court, the High Court by its impugned order held that it<br \/>\nwas necessary to inquire into the allegations made against the<br \/>\nsaid Minister. It directed the Central Bureau of Investigation<br \/>\n(CBI) at Delhi to hold an inquiry into the allegations made<br \/>\nagainst the said Minister (respondent No.2) as early as possible,<br \/>\npreferably within 4 months from the date of the production of<br \/>\nthe certified copy of the impugned order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt is this order that is challenged in these appeals. Mr.<br \/>\nMukul Rohtagi, learned Additional Solicitor General,<br \/>\ncontended before us that the High Court could not have directed<br \/>\nan inquiry by the CBI against the Minister concerned without<br \/>\ncoming to a conclusion that there was a prima facie case to hold<br \/>\nsuch an inquiry which conclusion according to him ought to be<br \/>\nbased on the material on record which obviously means the<br \/>\nallegations made in the writ petition as also the denial of the<br \/>\nMinister concerned should also be taken into consideration. In<br \/>\nsupport of his argument, he has placed strong reliance on the<br \/>\njudgment of this Court in Common Cause, a Registered Society<br \/>\nv. Union of India &amp; Ors. [1999 (6) SCC 667]. Mr. G L Sanghi,<br \/>\nlearned senior counsel appearing for the concerned Minister,<br \/>\nhas supported the above argument and has contended that there<br \/>\nis not even an iota of truth in the allegations made against the<br \/>\nMinister, hence, the High Court could not have directed an<br \/>\ninquiry.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tPer contra, Mr. P.N. Misra, learned senior counsel<br \/>\nappearing for the writ petitioner, pointed out that the allegations<br \/>\nagainst the Minister are very serious and the same pertained to<br \/>\nmany incidents and similar allegations have been made against<br \/>\nthe Minister by a large number of aggrieved Government<br \/>\nservants before the High Court in their respective writ petitions.<br \/>\nHe said that there was sufficient material to come to the<br \/>\nconclusion that the allegations made against the Minister are<br \/>\ngenuine, thus, he supported the impugned order of the High<br \/>\nCourt.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tWhile none can dispute the power of the High Court<br \/>\nunder Article 226 to direct an inquiry by the CBI, the said<br \/>\npower can be exercised only in cases where there is sufficient<br \/>\nmaterial to come to a prima facie conclusion that there is a need<br \/>\nfor such inquiry. It is not sufficient to have such material in the<br \/>\npleadings. On the contrary, there is a need for the High Court<br \/>\non consideration of such pleadings to come to the conclusion<br \/>\nthat the material before it is sufficient to direct such an inquiry<br \/>\nby the CBI. This is a requirement which is clearly deducible<br \/>\nfrom the judgment of this Court in the case of Common Cause<br \/>\n(supra). This Court in the said judgment at paragraph 174 of the<br \/>\nreport has held thus :\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The other direction, namely, the direction<br \/>\nto CBI to investigate &#8220;any other offence&#8221; is<br \/>\nwholly erroneous and cannot be sustained.<br \/>\nObviously, direction for investigation can be<br \/>\ngiven only if an offence is, prima facie,<br \/>\nfound to have been committed or a person&#8217;s<br \/>\ninvolvement is prima facie established, but a<br \/>\ndirection to CBI to investigate whether any<br \/>\nperson has committed an offence or not<br \/>\ncannot be legally given. Such a direction<br \/>\nwould be contrary to the concept and<br \/>\nphilosophy of &#8220;LIFE&#8221; and &#8220;LIBERTY&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>guaranteed to a person under Article 21 of<br \/>\nthe Constitution. This direction is in<br \/>\ncomplete negation of various decisions of<br \/>\nthis Court in which the concept of &#8220;LIFE&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>has been explained in a manner which has<br \/>\ninfused &#8220;LIFE&#8221; into the letters of Article\n<\/p>\n<p>21.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIt is seen from the above decision of this Court that the<br \/>\nright to life under Article 21 includes the right of a person to<br \/>\nlive without being hounded by the Police or the CBI to find out<br \/>\nwhether he has committed any offence or is living as a law-<br \/>\nabiding citizen. Therefore, it is clear that a decision to direct an<br \/>\ninquiry by the CBI against a person can only be done if the<br \/>\nHigh Court after considering the material on record comes to a<br \/>\nconclusion that such material does disclose a prima facie case<br \/>\ncalling for an investigation by the CBI or any other similar<br \/>\nagency, and the same cannot be done as a matter of routine or<br \/>\nmerely because a party makes some such allegations. In the<br \/>\ninstant case, we see that the High Court without coming to a<br \/>\ndefinite conclusion that there is a prima facie case established to<br \/>\ndirect an inquiry has proceeded on the basis of &#8216;ifs&#8217; and &#8216;buts&#8217;<br \/>\nand thought it appropriate that the inquiry should be made by<br \/>\nthe CBI. With respect, we think that this is not what is required<br \/>\nby the law as laid down by this Court in the case of Common<br \/>\nCause (supra).\n<\/p>\n<p>Just to point out that there is no prima facie finding by<br \/>\nthe High Court, while directing an inquiry by the impugned<br \/>\norder, we would like to extract the following few sentences :\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAt page 8 of the impugned judgment, it is stated : &#8220;It is<br \/>\nalso alleged that the petitioner is being harassed owing to the<br \/>\nreason that he was not amenable to the illegal demands made by<br \/>\nthe Minister concerned.&#8221; The High Court further observed :<br \/>\n&#8220;We however, forbear from excoriating the Minister on the<br \/>\nbasis of what has been said in the said News Magazine at this<br \/>\nstage.&#8221;\t Proceeding further, the Court observed : &#8220;If the<br \/>\nallegations in the writ petitions are correct, the rights of the<br \/>\nrespondents must be vindicated and the party at whose instance<br \/>\nsuch orders have been issued in bad faith, his continuance in the<br \/>\noffice is not in public interest.&#8221;  At page 9 of the judgment, the<br \/>\nlearned Judges observed : &#8220;If the allegations made in these and<br \/>\nvarious other writ petitions are found to have any ring of truth,<br \/>\nno sane person can claim that the affairs of the State are being<br \/>\nrun in accord with the Constitution.&#8221; From the above, we see<br \/>\nthat the High Court has merely quoted certain allegations made<br \/>\nagainst the Minister. It has not taken into consideration the<br \/>\nreply given by the Minister. While directing an inquiry by the<br \/>\nCBI, the High Court, as stated in the judgment of this Court in<br \/>\nthe case of Common Cause (supra), must record a prima facie<br \/>\nfinding as to the truth of such allegations with reference to the<br \/>\nreply filed. In the instant case, we have noticed that the High<br \/>\nCourt has merely proceeded on the basis of the averments made<br \/>\nin the petitions without taking into consideration the reply filed<br \/>\nand without expressing its prima facie opinion in regard to<br \/>\nthese allegations. This having been not done, we find it<br \/>\nnecessary that the judgment impugned should be set aside and<br \/>\nthe matters be remanded to the High Court to consider the<br \/>\npleadings of the parties and decide whether the material on<br \/>\nrecord is sufficient to direct the inquiry by the CBI. While<br \/>\ndoing so, it will take into consideration not only the allegations<br \/>\nmade in the writ petitions but also the reply given by the<br \/>\nMinister. After such an exercise if the Court still thinks that the<br \/>\nallegations require a further investigation by the CBI then it<br \/>\nmay do so after recording a prima facie finding which, of<br \/>\ncourse, will be for the limited purpose of directing an inquiry.<br \/>\nWe make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion<br \/>\nin regard to the merits of the allegations or the reply thereto<br \/>\nbecause this is something which has to be done by the High<br \/>\nCourt in the first instance.\n<\/p>\n<p>The appeals are allowed and the impugned judgment is<br \/>\nset aside. The matters are remanded to the High Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>SLP  Nos.5097-5102\/2001 :\n<\/p>\n<p>\tLeave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>These appeals are preferred against the order made by the<br \/>\nHigh Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Misc. W.P.<br \/>\nNo.47130 of 2000 etc. on 1.2.2001. A Division Bench of the<br \/>\nHigh Court of Allahabad by the impugned judgment has held<br \/>\nthat the petitioner in the said writ petitions has an alternate<br \/>\nremedy by way of petitions before the U.P. Public Service<br \/>\nTribunal (the tribunal), and had permitted the writ petitioner<br \/>\ntherein\t to approach the tribunal and directed the tribunal to<br \/>\nentertain any such petition to be filed by the writ petitioner<br \/>\nwithout raising any objection as to limitation. There was a<br \/>\nfurther direction to the tribunal to decide the matter<br \/>\nexpeditiously.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tMr. Sunil Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the<br \/>\npetitioner, contended that the remedy before the tribunal under<br \/>\nthe U.P. Public Service Tribunal Act is wholly illusory<br \/>\ninasmuch as the tribunal has no power to grant an interim order.<br \/>\nTherefore, he contends that the High Court ought not to have<br \/>\nrelegated the petitioner to a fresh proceeding before the said<br \/>\ntribunal. We do not agree with these arguments of the learned<br \/>\ncounsel. When the statute has provided for the constitution of a<br \/>\ntribunal for adjudicating the disputes of a Government servant,<br \/>\nthe fact that the tribunal has no authority to grant an interim<br \/>\norder is no ground to by-pass the said tribunal. In an<br \/>\nappropriate case after entertaining the petitions by an aggrieved<br \/>\nparty if the tribunal declines an interim order on the ground that<br \/>\nit has no such power then it is possible that such aggrieved<br \/>\nparty can seek remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution but<br \/>\nthat is no ground to by-pass the said tribunal in the first instance<br \/>\nitself. Having perused the impugned order, we find no infirmity<br \/>\nwhatsoever in the said order and the High Court was justified in<br \/>\ndirecting the petitioner to approach the tribunal. In the said<br \/>\nview of the matter, the appeals are dismissed. No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>SLP  Nos.16496-97\/2001 :\n<\/p>\n<p>\tIn view of our judgment in C.A. Nos. 3358-59\/2002 @<br \/>\nSLP  Nos.6126-27 of 2001, no further orders are necessary in<br \/>\nthese petitions. They are disposed of accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t.J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t(N. Santosh Hegde)<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t..J.\n<\/p>\n<p>May  7, 2002.\t\t\t\t\t(Shivaraj V. Patil)<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">1<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">1<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Sescerrevtiacreys,, &#8230; vs Sahngoo Ram Arya &amp; Anr on 7 May, 2002 Author: S Hegde Bench: N. Santosh Hegde, Shivaraj V. Patil CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 3358-3359 of 2002 PETITIONER: SESCERREVTIACREYS,, MUI.NPO.R&amp;IRORRISG.ATION &amp; RURAL ENGG. Vs. RESPONDENT: SAHNGOO RAM ARYA &amp; ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07\/05\/2002 BENCH: N. Santosh Hegde &amp; [&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-123147","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>Sescerrevtiacreys,, ... vs Sahngoo Ram Arya &amp; Anr on 7 May, 2002 - 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\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sescerrevtiacreys,, ... vs Sahngoo Ram Arya &amp; Anr on 7 May, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002\" \/>\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=\"2002-05-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-03-11T16:07:39+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sescerrevtiacreys,, &#8230; vs Sahngoo Ram Arya &amp; Anr on 7 May, 2002\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-05-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-11T16:07:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002\"},\"wordCount\":1881,\"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\\\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002\",\"name\":\"Sescerrevtiacreys,, ... vs Sahngoo Ram Arya &amp; Anr on 7 May, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2002-05-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-03-11T16:07:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sescerrevtiacreys,, &#8230; vs Sahngoo Ram Arya &amp; Anr on 7 May, 2002\"}]},{\"@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":"Sescerrevtiacreys,, ... vs Sahngoo Ram Arya &amp; Anr on 7 May, 2002 - 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\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sescerrevtiacreys,, ... vs Sahngoo Ram Arya &amp; Anr on 7 May, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2002-05-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-03-11T16:07:39+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sescerrevtiacreys,, &#8230; vs Sahngoo Ram Arya &amp; Anr on 7 May, 2002","datePublished":"2002-05-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-11T16:07:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002"},"wordCount":1881,"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\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002","name":"Sescerrevtiacreys,, ... vs Sahngoo Ram Arya &amp; Anr on 7 May, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2002-05-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-03-11T16:07:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sescerrevtiacreys-vs-sahngoo-ram-arya-anr-on-7-may-2002#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sescerrevtiacreys,, &#8230; vs Sahngoo Ram Arya &amp; Anr on 7 May, 2002"}]},{"@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\/123147","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=123147"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/123147\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=123147"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=123147"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=123147"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}