{"id":132787,"date":"2010-02-10T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-02-09T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010"},"modified":"2015-01-08T16:01:27","modified_gmt":"2015-01-08T10:31:27","slug":"vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010","title":{"rendered":"Vikas Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 February, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madhya Pradesh High Court<\/div>\n
Vikas Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 February, 2010<\/div>\n
                                              -1 -\n                                                                       W.P. No.3537\/2009 (S)\n\n\n\n\n       HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH\n         PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR\n                        Writ Petition No. 3537\/2009 (S)\n\n\nPETITIONER                         :        Vikas Pathak\n                                           Versus\nRESPONDENTS                        :        State of Madhya Pradesh & others\n\n\n\n                                       P R E S E N T:\n                       Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.K. Gupta\n-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\nFor the Petitioner : Ms. Gurleen Chhabra, Advocate\nFor the Respondent : Mr. Sudhir K. Shrivastava, Govt. Advocate\n-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\n                                        ORDER\n<\/pre>\n
                                       10-02-2010<\/p>\n
        The present petition has been filed by the petitioner
\nimpugning the correctness of the order dated 10.12.2007,
\nAnnexure P\/1, whereby a penalty of stoppage of two annual
\nincrements without cumulative effect has been imposed on the
\npetitioner after holding a departmental enquiry. The petitioner
\nhas also called in question the legality and validity of the order
\ndated 14.11.2008 passed by the appellate authority whereby the
\nappeal of the petitioner against the order of penalty has been
\ndismissed. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction to the
\nrespondents to open the seal cover and release the benefit of
\npromotion to higher cadre (Senior Scale) and Senior Selection
\nGrade with all consequential benefits.\n<\/p>\n
2.      In short, the facts giving rise to this writ petition are that
\nat the relevant time in the year 2002 while serving as Deputy
\nSuperintendent of Police (AJAKS) a departmental enquiry was
\nproceeded against the petitioner after holding a preliminary
\nenquiry wherein as many as four charges which were levelled
\nagainst the petitioner were found proved. The report of the
\npreliminary enquiry dated 6.8.2004 is Annexure P\/8. Thereafter,
\na charge sheet dated 26.8.2004, Annexure-P\/9, was served upon\n<\/p>\n
                                     -2 –\n<\/p>\n
                                                         W.P. No.3537\/2009 (S)<\/p>\n
the petitioner levelling as many as four charges which are
\nenumerated in Annexure-P\/9. The crux of the charges as
\nenumerated in the charge sheet is that the petitioner in order to
\navoid the arrest in Crime No.172\/04, which was registered
\nagainst   him    at   Police     Station,     Ratibad    District     Sehore,
\nproceeded on medical leave w.e.f. 2.7.2004. The second charge
\nwas to the effect that the petitioner had not duly signed the
\nmedical certificates dated 2.7.2004 and 10.7.2004. Thirdly, it
\nwas alleged that the petitioner left for Jhansi from Bhopal on
\n10.7.2004 without obtaining prior permission of the respondent
\nNo.3. The last of the four charges levelled against the petitioner
\nwas that while serving as DSP (AJAKS) he was visiting Bhopal
\nwithout permission.\n<\/p>\n
3.    The petitioner submitted a detailed reply to the said
\ncharge sheet which is contained in Annexure-P\/10. It was
\ncontented inter-alia that the charges do not constitute a
\nmisconduct      within   the     provisions    of   M.P.    Civil     Services
\n(Conduct)    Rules       1965.     According        to     the      petitioner,
\nsimultaneously he was also prosecuted in Crime No.172\/04,
\nwhich ultimately led to honourable acquittal of the petitioner
\nvide judgment dated 17.11.2004 as contained in Annexure-P\/11.
\nThereafter, the petitioner was reinstated in service vide order
\ndated 24.3.2005, Annexure-P\/12. However, a departmental
\nenquiry   against     the   petitioner      was     proceeded       with   and
\nultimately the Inquiry Officer held the petitioner guilty of the
\ncharges No. 1, 3 and 4 and further found the charge No.2 as
\npartially proved. The said enquiry report is contained in
\nAnnexure-P\/13. The petitioner again submitted a detailed
\nrepresentation refuting the findings arrived at by the inquiry
\nofficer and thereafter being aggrieved the same approached this
\nCourt in W.P. No.16748\/2007, which was ultimately disposed of
\nvide order 10.12.2007 with a direction to the Director General
\nof Police to take appropriate steps with regard to the findings
\nsubmitted by the Inquiry Officer within a period of three
\nmonths. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner vide order
\nimpugned order dated 10.12.2007 as contained in Annexure-P\/1
\nwas inflicted with a penalty of stoppage of two annual\n<\/p>\n
                                 -3 –\n<\/p>\n
                                                 W.P. No.3537\/2009 (S)<\/p>\n
increments with non-cumulative effect. Being aggrieved by the
\norder of penalty the the petitioner submitted a detail appeal
\nbefore the Appellate Authority which is contained in Annexure-
\nP\/16. The appeal also failed and it was turned down vide order
\ndated 14.11.2008 as contained in Annexure-P\/2.\n<\/p>\n
4.    It is the grievance of the petitioner that the appellate
\nauthority while rejecting the appeal of the petitioner has not
\nascribed any reason and by way of a non-speaking order the
\nappeal has been summarily rejected.\n<\/p>\n
5.    True it is, the appeal against the order of penalty so
\npreferred by the petitioner was a statutory appeal in terms of
\nRule 27 of the M.P. Civil Services (Classification, Control &
\nAppeal) Rules, 1966, therefore, it being a statutory appeal a
\nduty was cast upon the appellate authority to decide the said
\nappeal by ascribing reasons for rejection of the appeal. The
\npetitioner in his appeal has raised many a grounds but a perusal
\nof the order dated 14.11.2008, Annexure P\/2, whereby the
\nappeal of the petitioner against the order of penalty has been
\nrejected specifically reveals that the appellate authority has not
\ngiven any reason while rejecting the appeal and there is no
\nconsideration to the points raised by the petitioner in his appeal.
\nThe appeal has been rejected by a reticent order thereby
\nwarranting interference of this Court to quash the same.\n<\/p>\n
6.    It is further contended on behalf of the petitioner that the
\nrecords of the enquiry were placed before the Department of
\nHome for consideration on completion of the enquiry. The
\nmatter was taken up by the Principal Secretary, Department of
\nHome who vide its order dated 17.4.2007 (internal page 125)
\ncame to a conclusion that out of four charges, the charges No.1,
\n2 and 3 were not substantiated, however, the only charge for
\nwhich the disciplinary action remained to be taken was the
\ncharge No.4 for which the Principal Secretary Home proposed
\nthe consideration of imposition of minor penalty of Censure
\nagainst the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that
\ncontrary to the proposed punishment, the Hon’ble Chief
\nMinister vide order-sheet dated Nil contained at internal page\n<\/p>\n
                                       -4 –\n<\/p>\n
                                                           W.P. No.3537\/2009 (S)<\/p>\n
     125 of the writ petition directed to enhance the punishment for
\n     stoppage of two increments without cumulative effect. On this
\n     basis, it is urged on behalf of the petitioner that the Hon’ble
\n     Chief Minister had no authority in law to enhance the
\n     punishment and that too without assigning any reason thereto.\n<\/p>\n
     7.    It is seen that in the present case the disciplinary
\n     authority of the petitioner is the respondent No.1 who after
\n     taking into account the charges and the report of the inquiry
\n     officer   vide   note-sheet   Annexure     P-17      recommended       for
\n     imposition of minor penalty of ‘censure’ upon the petitioner,
\n     however, the Hon’ble Chief Minister without ascribing any
\n     reason thereto directed to impose a higher penalty of stoppage
\n     of two annual increments without cumulative effect. Once the
\n     note-sheet was put up before the Hon’ble Chief Minister and he
\n     had chosen to impose a higher penalty than proposed by the
\n     disciplinary authority then there ought to have been some
\n     reason for the same but no reasons as such to impose the higher
\n     penalty have been given.\n<\/p>\n
     8.    In view of the aforesaid, the orders dated 10.12.2007,
\n     Annexure P\/1 and 14.11.2008 Annexure P\/2 are quashed. As
\n     both the impugned orders have been quashed, needless to
\n     emphasise, the respondents shall open the sealed cover
\n     envelope for his promotion to the next higher cadre as per law
\n     and in case the petitioner is found fit for the promotion, the
\n     necessary    order   of   promotion     shall   be    passed    with   all
\n     consequential benefits flowing therefrom. The entire exercise as
\n     such shall be conducted within a period of four months from the
\n     date the petitioner furnishes the certified copy of this order to
\n     the respondents. In the result, the petition succeeds and is
\n     allowed. No order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
                                                {R.K. GUPTA}
\n                                                     Judge
\nS\/\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madhya Pradesh High Court Vikas Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 February, 2010 -1 – W.P. No.3537\/2009 (S) HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR Writ Petition No. 3537\/2009 (S) PETITIONER : Vikas Pathak Versus RESPONDENTS : State of Madhya Pradesh & others P R E S E N T: […]<\/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":[8,24],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-132787","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madhya-pradesh-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nVikas Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 February, 2010 - 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\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vikas Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010\" \/>\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=\"2010-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-01-08T10:31:27+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Vikas Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 February, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-01-08T10:31:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1195,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madhya Pradesh High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010\",\"name\":\"Vikas Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-02-09T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-01-08T10:31:27+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vikas Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 February, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Vikas Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 February, 2010 - 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\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vikas Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-01-08T10:31:27+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Vikas Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 February, 2010","datePublished":"2010-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-01-08T10:31:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010"},"wordCount":1195,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madhya Pradesh High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010","name":"Vikas Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 February, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-02-09T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-01-08T10:31:27+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vikas-pathak-vs-the-state-of-madhya-pradesh-on-10-february-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vikas Pathak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 10 February, 2010"}]},{"@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\/132787","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=132787"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132787\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=132787"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=132787"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=132787"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}