{"id":125289,"date":"1994-05-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1994-05-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994"},"modified":"2015-10-27T01:32:40","modified_gmt":"2015-10-26T20:02:40","slug":"state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994","title":{"rendered":"State Of M.P vs L.P. Tiwari on 5 May, 1994"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
State Of M.P vs L.P. Tiwari on 5 May, 1994<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1994 AIR 2175, \t\t 1994 SCC (4) 468<\/div>\n
Author: K Ramaswamy<\/div>\n
Bench: Ramaswamy, K.<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nSTATE OF M.P.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nL.P. TIWARI\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT05\/05\/1994\n\nBENCH:\nRAMASWAMY, K.\nBENCH:\nRAMASWAMY, K.\nVENKATACHALA N. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1994 AIR 2175\t\t  1994 SCC  (4) 468\n JT 1994 (4)\t40\t  1994 SCALE  (2)1109\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
\t\t\t   ORDER\n<\/p>\n
1.   Delay condoned.  Leave granted.\n<\/p>\n
2.   The appellant had contemplated disciplinary proceedings
\nagainst\t the respondent and considered it expedient to\tkeep
\nthe   respondent   under   suspension\tpending\t  the\tsaid
\nproceedings.  By proceeding dated 24-4-1990, the  respondent
\nwas  suspended\tand it was served on him  on  25-9-1990.   A
\ncharge-sheet  was framed against the respondent on  5-7-1990
\nand  was  sent\tto  the\t Engineer-in-Chief,  at\t Bhopal\t for
\neffecting  its\tservice who in his  letter  dated  8-11-1990
\nrequested the Chief Engineer (Central) at Jabalpur to  serve
\nthe  charge-sheet  on the respondent.  The  latter  in\tturn
\nendorsed  it to the Supdt.  Engineer, Panna who deputed\t his
\nhead clerk to serve the charge-sheet on the respondent.\t The
\nendorsement made by the head clerk on 21-12-1990, ads thus:
\n“The Head Clerk had gone to Pahadukodi and met Shri  Tiwari,
\nExecutive  Engineer,  and  gave him  the  letters.   But  as
\ninformed  by  the Head Clerk in writing that he\t refused  to
\naccept the said letters on some pretext, the same are  being
\nsent to you in original.”\n<\/p>\n
Thereafter, the service was effected after the expiry of  90
\ndays.  The respondent challenged the order of suspension  in
\nthe   Administrative  Tribunal\ton  the\t -round\t  that\t the
\ndisciplinary proceedings were initiated after the expiry  of
\n90   days  and\tthat  therefore,  suspension   was   without
\njurisdiction  and  void.  That plea found  favour  with\t the
\ntribunal  in OA No. 1056 of 1992, which by its\torder  dated
\n27-8-1992  set\taside the order of suspension.\t Thus,\tthis
\nappeal by special leave.\n<\/p>\n
3.   The  appellant’s  contention  is  that  the  respondent
\nhaving\thad  knowledge\tof  the\t order\tof  suspension\t and
\ninitiation  of\tthe  proceedings, made\thimself\t scarce\t and
\nevaded the receipt of the charge-sheet and all attempts made
\nby the appellants, within the period of limitation to  serve
\nthe  chargesheet proved futile.\t Having successfully  evaded
\nthe receipt of the charge-\n<\/p>\n
470<\/span><\/p>\n
sheet till the expiry of 90 days, the respondent  approached
\ntile tribunal in 1992 and claimed that his suspension  after
\nthe  expiry of 90 days prescribed under Rule 9 of  the\tM.P.
\nCivil  Services (Classification, Control and Appeal)  Rules,
\n1966, for short ‘the Rules’ had become illegal and void, and
\nhad stood revoked.  We find force in the contention.  It  is
\nseen  from  the\t letter addressed  by  the  Chief  Engineer,
\nJabalpur   to  the  Government\tthat  the  respondent,\t the
\nExecutive Engineer had not given the address nor reported to
\nthe  office  of\t the  Superintending  Engineer\tas  per\t the
\ndirections issued by the Government and that his whereabouts
\nwere  not known.  It would thus be clear that  after  having
\nhad  knowledge\tof  the\t suspension  order  the\t  respondent
\nthwarted  the attempt to serve the charge-sheet against\t him
\nand  thereby  refused  to receive it.\tHe  thus  evaded  to
\nreceive\t the  charge-sheet.  Rule 9 of\tthe  Rules  provides
\nthus:\n<\/p>\n
\t      “9.  (1)\tThe  appointing\t authority  or\t any
\n\t      authority\t to which it is subordinate  or\t the
\n\t      disciplinary authority or any other  authority
\n\t      empowered\t in that behalf by the\tGovernor  by
\n\t      general\tor  special  order,  may   place   a
\n\t      government servant under suspension –\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (a)where a disciplinary proceeding  against
\n\t      him is contemplated or is pending; or\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (b)where\ta case against him in respect  of
\n\t      any  criminal offence is under  investigation,
\n\t      inquiry or trial:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      Provided that where the order of suspension is
\n\t      made by an authority lower than the appointing
\n\t      authority,  such\tauthority  shall   forthwith
\n\t      report   to  the\tappointing   authority\t the
\n\t      circumstances in which the order was made.
\n\t      (2)A government servant shall be deemed  to
\n\t      have been placed under suspension by an  order
\n\t      of appointing authority –\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (a)with\teffect\tfrom  the  date\t of   his
\n\t      detention,  if he is detained custody  whether
\n\t      on  a  criminal  charge or  otherwise,  for  a
\n\t      period exceeding forty-eight hours;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (b)with\teffect\tfrom  the  date\t of   his
\n\t      conviction, if in the event of conviction\t for
\n\t      an  offence,  he\tis sentenced to\t a  term  of
\n\t      imprisonment  exceeding forty-eight hours\t and
\n\t      is  not  forthwith  dismissed  or\t removed  or
\n\t      compulsorily   retired  consequent   to\tsuch
\n\t      conviction.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      Explanation.- The period of forty-eight  hours
\n\t      referred\tto  in clause (b) of  this  sub-rule
\n\t      shall be computed from the commencement of the
\n\t      imprisonment after the conviction and for this
\n\t      purpose, intermittent periods of imprisonment,
\n\t      if any, shall be taken into account.
\n\t      (2-a)  Where  a government servant  is  placed
\n\t      under suspension under clause (a) of  sub-rule
\n\t      (1), the order of suspension shall contain the
\n\t      reasons  for  making such order and  where  it
\n\t      proposed\tto  hold  an  enquiry  against\tsuch
\n\t      government  servant under Rule 14, a  copy  of
\n\t      articles\t of   charges,\tthe   statement\t  of
\n\t      imputations of misconduct or misbehavior and a
\n\t      list of documents and witnesses by which\teach
\n\t      article of charge is proposed to be  sustained
\n\t      shall be issued or caused to be issued by the
\n\t      471<\/span>
\n\t      disciplinary  authority  to  such\t  government
\n\t      servant as required by subrule (4) of Rule  16
\n\t      within  a period of 45 days from the  date  of
\n\t      order of suspension.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      Provided that where the disciplinary authority
\n\t      is  the State Government, the copy of  charges
\n\t      and  other documents mentioned above shall  be
\n\t      issued   or  caused  to  be  issued  to\tsuch
\n\t      government servant within a period of 90\tdays
\n\t      from the date of order of suspension.
\n\t      (2-b)  Where the disciplinary authority  fails
\n\t      to issue to the government servant, a copy  of
\n\t      the charges and other documents referred to in
\n\t      sub-rule\t(2-a) within the period of 45  days,
\n\t      the   disciplinary  authority  shall,   before
\n\t      expiry  of the said period, obtain  orders  in
\n\t      writing of the State Government for  extension
\n\t      of the said period of suspension.
\n\t      Provided\tthat the period of suspension  shall
\n\t      in  no case be enhanced beyond a period of  90
\n\t      days from the date of the order of suspension.
\n\t      (3)Where\ta penalty of dismissal,\t removal  or
\n\t      compulsory  retirement  from  service  imposed
\n\t      upon a government servant under suspension, is
\n\t      set  aside in appeal or on review under  these
\n\t      rules  and  the case is remitted\tfor  further
\n\t      inquiry\tor   action  or\t  with\t any   other
\n\t      directions, the order of his suspension  shall
\n\t      be  deemed to have continued in force  on\t and
\n\t      from  the\t date  of  the\toriginal  order\t  of
\n\t      dismissal,  removal or  compulsory  retirement
\n\t      and  shall  remain  in  force  until   further
\n\t      orders.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (4)Where\ta penalty of dismissal,\t removal  or
\n\t      compulsory  retirement  from  service  imposed
\n\t      upon  a  government servant, is set  aside  or
\n\t      declared or rendered void in consequence of or
\n\t      by  a  decision  of a Court  of  law  and\t the
\n\t      disciplinary authority, on a consideration  of
\n\t      the circumstances of the case, decides to hold
\n\t      a\t  further   inquiry  against  him   on\t the
\n\t      allegations on which the penalty of dismissal,
\n\t      removal\t or   compulsory   retirement\t was
\n\t      originally  imposed,  the\t government  servant
\n\t      shall  be\t deemed to have\t been  placed  under
\n\t      suspension  by the appointing  authority\tfrom
\n\t      the  date of the original order of  dismissal,
\n\t      removal  or  compulsory retirement  and  shall
\n\t      continue\tto  remain  under  suspension  until
\n\t      further orders.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (5)(a)  An order of suspension made or  deemed
\n\t      to  have\tbeen  made under  this\trule,  shall
\n\t      continue\tto  remain  in\tforce  until  it  is
\n\t      modified or revoked by the authority competent
\n\t      to do so.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      Provided\tthat the order of  suspension  shall
\n\t      stand  revoked  on  expiry of  the  period  of
\n\t      forty-five  days\tfrom the date  of  order  of
\n\t      suspension  in  case of copy  of\tcharges\t and
\n\t      other documents referred to in sub-rule  (2-a)
\n\t      are  not issued to such government servant  by
\n\t      the  disciplinary authority (if it is not\t the
\n\t      State  Govt.) without obtaining the orders  of
\n\t      the  State  Government for  extension  of\t the
\n\t      period  for  issue of the said  documents,  as
\n\t      required under sub-rule (2-b).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      Provided further that the order of  suspension
\n\t      shall stand revoked on expiry of the period of
\n\t      90 days from the date of order of\t suspension,
\n\t      in
\n\t      472<\/span>
\n\t      case  the copy of charges and other  documents
\n\t      referred\tto in sub-rule (2-a) are not  issued
\n\t      to such government servant.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
4.Rule\t 9  thus  contemplates\tthat   the   disciplinary
\nauthority  or any authority empowered by the Governor  by  a
\ngeneral\t or  special  order  is\t authorised  to\t place\t the
\ngovernment  servant  under  suspension\twhere\tdisciplinary
\nproceedings  against him are contemplated or are pending  or
\nwhere a case against him in respect of any criminal  offence
\nis  under  investigation  inquiry or trial.   The  order  of
\nsuspension  shall contain the reasons for making such  order
\nand  where it proposes to hold an enquiry against him  under
\nRule  14,  a copy of articles of the charges,  statement  of
\nimputation  of\tmisconduct  or misbehaviour and\t a  list  of
\ndocuments and witnesses by which char-es are proposed to  be
\nsustained  shall  be issued or caused to be  issued  by\t the
\ndisciplinary  authority to such government servant within  a
\nperiod of 45 days from the date of order of suspension.\t  By
\noperation  of  the  proviso  to\t sub-rule  (2-a)  where\t the
\ndisciplinary authority is the State Government, the copy  of
\ncharges and other documents mentioned above shall be  issued
\nor  caused to be issued to such government servant within  a
\nperiod of 90 days from the date of order of suspension.\t The
\nobject\tappears\t to be that the competent  authority  having
\nplaced\ta  delinquent officer under suspension,\t cannot\t sit
\nover the case without prompt follow-up action of  conducting
\nan  inquiry  into the alleged misconduct.   The\t dereliction
\nthereof\t entails  the authority with denuding the  power  to
\ncontinue  the officer under suspension, though the power  of
\nenquiry\t subsists.  It would be clear from proviso  to\tRule
\n9(2-b) which says that “the period of suspension shall in no
\ncase be continued beyond the period of 90 days from the date
\nof  the order of suspension”.  It would thus be\t clear\tthat
\nwhere disciplinary proceedings are pending or  contemplated,
\nit  is\topen  to  the  appointing  authority,\tdisciplinary
\nauthority  or authorised officer to keep government  servant
\nunder  suspension and have the articles of charges  to-ether
\nwith the particulars mentioned hereinbefore “shall be issued
\nor caused to be issued” by the authority to such  government
\nservant within the period mentioned hereinbefore.  On its so
\nissuing\t the  order  of suspension remains  in\tforce  until
\nrevoked\t on reconsideration in terms of the rules  based  on
\nfacts  scenario\t or proceedings terminated by  an  order  on
\nmerits.\t It is thereby clear that service of the article  of
\ncharge\tis  not\t a  condition  precedent.   Putting  it\t  in
\ntransmission within the period is sufficient compliance.  No
\ndoubt  every  endeavour has to be made to have\tthe  charge-
\nsheet  served  on  the delinquent, but\tthe  delinquent\t who
\nevades receipt of it, cannot be allowed to take advantage of
\nsuch evasion.\n<\/p>\n
5.This\tCourt in a recent judgment in  Delhi  Development
\nAuthority  v.  H.C.  Khurana1<\/a> considered  the  effect  of  a
\nsimilar provision and held thus: (SCC p. 197, Headnote)
\n“The  meaning of the word ‘issued’ has to be  gathered\tfrom
\nthe  context in which it is used.  The decision to  initiate
\ndisciplinary   proceedings  cannot  be\tsubsequent  to\t the
\nissuance of the charge-sheet,
\n1   (1993) 3 SCC 196: 1993 SCC (L&S) 736: (1993) 24 ATC 763
\n473<\/span>
\nsince  issue  of the charge-sheet is a\tconsequence  of\t the
\ndecision to initiate disciplinary proceedings.\tThe  service
\nof  the charge-sheet on the government servant\tfollows\t the
\ndecision  to initiate disciplinary proceedings, and it\tdoes
\nnot  precede or coincide with that decision.  The delay,  if
\nany,  in  service  of the  charge-sheet\t to  the  government
\nservant,  after it has been framed and despatched, does\t not
\nhave  the effect of delaying initiation of the\tdisciplinary
\nproceedings,  inasmuch\tas  information\t to  the  government
\nservant of the charges framed against him, by service of the
\ncharge-sheet,  is not a part of the decision-making  process
\nof   the   authorities\tfor  initiating\t  the\tdisciplinary
\nproceedings.   The contrary view would defeat the object  by
\nenabling  the government servant, if so inclined,  to  evade
\nservice and thereby frustrate the decision and get promotion
\nin spite of that decision.”\n<\/p>\n
6.Thus, it could be seen that what is emphasised in the rule
\nis  initiation\tof theproceedings within the  period  of  90
\ndays, and not effecting the service of thearticles of charge
\nissued\tor caused to be issued when the\t government  servant
\nmakes  himself scarce.\tNon-service, therefore, per se\tdoes
\nnot  render the initiation of the  disciplinary\t proceedings
\nagainst the delinquent officer illegal, after the expiry  of
\n90  days.  As pointed out by this Court and as found on\t the
\nfacts  on  hand that the  delinquent  employee\tsuccessfully
\nevaded\tthe  receipt  of  charge-sheet\twithin\tthe   period
\nprescribed  under the rule and then claimed that  initiation
\nof  the\t proceedings  or the  order  of\t suspension  becomes
\nillegal\t or  non est since the proceedings  were  not  taken
\nagainst him within the period prescribed under Rule 9 or the
\nsimilar\t rule.\tIn other words, allowing the  delinquent  to
\nput a premium on successful avoidance of receipt of  charge-
\nsheet  and  plead to his advantage, the\t making\t of  service
\nineffectual, should never be countenanced.  Hence, there  is
\nno  need  to give satisfactory explanation for\tevery  day’s
\ndelay  in  service  of charge-sheet on\tthe  delinquent,  as
\nopined\tby the tribunal.  Under these circumstances, we\t are
\nclearly\t of  the  opinion that the  tribunal  has  committed
\nmanifest grievous error of law in allowing the petition.\n<\/p>\n
7.   It\t is contended by Mr Raju Ramachandran,\tthe  learned
\ncounsel\t for  the  respondent, that pursuant  to  the  order
\npassed\tby  the\t tribunal,  when  the  respondent  had\tbeen
\nreinstated,  such order does not call for interference.\t  We
\nfind  no  justification\t to accede  to\this  contention.   A
\npremium\t cannot\t be allowed to be put on avoidance  and\t the
\ndirections  of the tribunal, which are found to be  illegal,
\ncannot be made the basis to allow the respondent to main  in
\nservice\t when the disciplinary authority had found  that  it
\nwas expedient to keep the respondent under suspension.\t The
\nmere  fact  that  the respondent  was  reinstated  to  avoid
\ncontempt proceedings or due compliance of the impugned order
\ncannot\tbe the reason, nor a justification for us to  refuse
\nto  interfere  with illegal order passed  by  the  tribunal.
\nAccordingly,  the  appeal  is allowed.\t The  order  of\t the
\ntribunal  is  set aside and the order of the  Government  is
\nrestored.  But in the circumstances we order no costs.\n<\/p>\n
475<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India State Of M.P vs L.P. Tiwari on 5 May, 1994 Equivalent citations: 1994 AIR 2175, 1994 SCC (4) 468 Author: K Ramaswamy Bench: Ramaswamy, K. PETITIONER: STATE OF M.P. Vs. RESPONDENT: L.P. TIWARI DATE OF JUDGMENT05\/05\/1994 BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. VENKATACHALA N. (J) CITATION: 1994 AIR 2175 1994 SCC […]<\/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-125289","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nState Of M.P vs L.P. Tiwari on 5 May, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of M.P vs L.P. Tiwari on 5 May, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1994-05-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-10-26T20:02:40+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=\"12 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-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of M.P vs L.P. Tiwari on 5 May, 1994\",\"datePublished\":\"1994-05-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-26T20:02:40+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994\"},\"wordCount\":2314,\"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\\\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994\",\"name\":\"State Of M.P vs L.P. Tiwari on 5 May, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1994-05-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-26T20:02:40+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of M.P vs L.P. Tiwari on 5 May, 1994\"}]},{\"@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 M.P vs L.P. Tiwari on 5 May, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of M.P vs L.P. Tiwari on 5 May, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1994-05-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-10-26T20:02:40+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of M.P vs L.P. Tiwari on 5 May, 1994","datePublished":"1994-05-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-26T20:02:40+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994"},"wordCount":2314,"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\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994","name":"State Of M.P vs L.P. Tiwari on 5 May, 1994 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1994-05-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-26T20:02:40+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-m-p-vs-l-p-tiwari-on-5-may-1994#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of M.P vs L.P. Tiwari on 5 May, 1994"}]},{"@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\/125289","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=125289"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/125289\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=125289"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=125289"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=125289"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}