{"id":140872,"date":"1981-04-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1981-04-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981"},"modified":"2015-03-25T17:08:08","modified_gmt":"2015-03-25T11:38:08","slug":"r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981","title":{"rendered":"R.K. Garg, Advocate vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 April, 1981"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">R.K. Garg, Advocate vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 April, 1981<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1981 SCALE  (1)767<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Y Chandrachud<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Chandrachud, Y.V. ((Cj)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nR.K. GARG, ADVOCATE\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT22\/04\/1981\n\nBENCH:\nCHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ)\nBENCH:\nCHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ)\nSEN, A.P. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1981 SCALE  (1)767\n\n\nACT:\n     Contempt of  Courts Act  1971, Ss.2, 15 and 19-Advocate\nappearing in case-Throwing shoe at presiding Judge-Guilty of\ncontempt of Court-Punished with imprisonment and fine.\n     Legal  Profession-Professional   ethics  and   cultured\nconduct-Results of violation of.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n     The appellant  a practising  Advocate appeared  for the\npetitioner in  a petition  under the Rent Act. When the case\nwas called  out for  hearing, the  Judge  noticed  that\t the\npetitioner had\tnot paid  the process  fee, as\ta result  of\nwhich the summons could not be issued to the respondent. The\nJudge, proceeded to dismiss the petition under Order IX Rule\n2 of  the  Civil  Procedure  Code.  Taking  umbrage  at\t the\ndismissal of  the petition  the appellant hurled his shoe at\nthe Judge which hit him on the shoulder. The Judge intending\nto proceed  under Section  228 of  the Penal  Code issued  a\nwarrant of  arrest  against  the  appellant.  The  appellant\nevaded the  warrant  and  successfully\tmanaged\t to  prevent\nproceedings being taken by the Judge for the contempt of his\nCourt. The  Judge thereupon  made a  reference to  the\tHigh\nCourt under  Section 15(2)  of the  Contempt of\t Courts Act,\n1971.\n     Before the\t High Court  the appellant  did not  dispute\nthat he hurled a shoe at the Judge. He explained his conduct\nby saying  that\t he  acted  under  an  irresistible  impulse\ngenerated by the provocative language used by the Judge. The\nHigh Court  being satisfied, that the appellant was making a\nfalse allegation  that the  Judge had  used abusive language\nagainst him  and that  he had given an untrue version of the\nvery genesis  of the  incident, held the appellant guilty of\ncontempt of  Court and\tsentenced him to simple imprisonment\nfor six months and a fine of Rs. 200\/-.\n     In the  appeal to\tthis Court  it was  pleaded that the\nappellant evidently  lost his  balance and  whether  or\t not\nthere was  any justification  for it,  he  acted  under\t the\nimpulse of  grave passion for which he had been sufficiently\npunished by  the publicity  which the  incident had received\nand the\t notoriety which  he had  invited for himself and as\nthe appellant  was genuinely  repentant for  his conduct  he\nshould be enlarged on a mere admonition.\n     Allowing the appeal in part,\n^\n     HELD: 1.  (i) The\tsentence of  simple imprisonment for\nsix months  is reduced to a period of one month and the fine\nfor Rs. 200\/- is enhanced to Rs. 1000\/-.\n537\nThe fine  if recovered\tshall be  paid over to the Legal Aid\nSociety functioning in the State. [540 G]\n     (ii) The appellant is guilty of conduct which is highly\nunbecoming of a practising lawyer. He hurled his shoe at the\nJudge in  order\t to  overawe  him  and\tto  bully  him\tinto\naccepting  his\tsubmission  that  the  case  should  not  be\ndismissed under Order IX Rule 2 C.P.C. The appellant did his\nbest or worst to see that the petition was not dismissed for\nnon-payment of\tprocess fee  and finding  that the Judge was\nnot willing  to accept his argument, he took out his shoe in\nshow of his physical prowess. [540 C]\n     (iii) The\tappellant's behaviour  is condemned.  It  is\nmost reprehensible  remembering that, as a practising lawyer\nhe is an officer of the Court. [540 D]\n     (iv) A  long sentence of imprisonment is not imposed on\nthe appellant since he has tendered an unconditional apology\nto this\t Court and  to the  trial Judge.  The  appellant  is\ndeeply regretful  and genuinely\t contrite. He  has  suffered\nenough in  mind and  reputation and  no greater\t purpose  is\ngoing to  be served  by subjecting  him\t to  a\tlong  bodily\nsuffering. [540 E, F]\n     2. (i)  The argument  of the appellant's counsel in the\nHigh Court  that: \"better part of discretion is to ignore it\ninstead\t of  fanning  it.  It  is  a  tussle  between  legal\nprofession and judiciary\", is as much to be regretted as the\nconduct of the appellant before the trial Judge. [541A-B]\n     (ii) The  Bar and the Bench are an integral part of the\nmechanism  which   administers\tjustice\t to  the  people.  A\ndiscourteous Judge  is like  an ill-tuned  instrument in the\nsetting of a Court room. But Members of the Bar will do well\nto remember  that flagrant violations of professional ethics\nand cultured  conduct  will  only  result  in  the  ultimate\ndestruction of\ta system  without  which  no  democracy\t can\nsurvive. [541 E, F]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>     CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Contempt Appeal No. 19<br \/>\nof 1981.\n<\/p>\n<p>     From the  judgment and  order dated  the 17th November,<br \/>\n1980 of the Himachal Pradesh High Court at Simla in Contempt<br \/>\nPetition (Crl.) No. 7 of 1980.\n<\/p>\n<p>     V. M.  Tarkunde, S.  S. Ray,  K.K.Venugopal, Dr.  L. M.<br \/>\nSinghvi, Kapil\tSibbal, C. M. Nayar and L. K. Pandey for the<br \/>\nAppellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>     L.\t N.  Sinha,  Attorney  General\tfor  the  Respondent<br \/>\n(Registrar, High Court)<br \/>\n     K. Parasaran,  Soli. General and Miss A. Subhashini for<br \/>\nthe Respondent (State of H. P.)<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">538<\/span><br \/>\n     The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\n     CHANDRACHUD,C. J.\tThis is\t an appeal under sec. 19(1)b<br \/>\nof the Contempt of Courts Act 1971, (&#8220;the Act&#8221;,) against the<br \/>\njudgment  of  the  High\t Court\tof  Himachal  Pradesh  dated<br \/>\nNovember 17, 1980 in Contempt Case (Criminal) No. 7 of 1980,<br \/>\nwhereby the  appellant was  sentenced to simple imprisonment<br \/>\nfor six months and a fine of Rs. 200.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The appellant  practises as  an Advocate at Solan which<br \/>\nis a  district place  in the  State of\tHimachal Pradesh. It<br \/>\nappears that only one court generally sits at Solan which is<br \/>\nthat of\t the Senior Sub-Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate.<br \/>\nThe learned  Judge,  who  presides  over  that\tCourt,\talso<br \/>\nexercises the  powers of  a Rent Controller and of the Court<br \/>\nof Small  Causes. On  June 18,\t1980, Shri Kuldip Chand Sud,<br \/>\nwho was\t the Presiding\tOfficer of  the Court, was hearing a<br \/>\npetition under\tthe Rent  Act in  which the  petitioner\t was<br \/>\nrepresented by\tthe appellant.\tWhen the case was called out<br \/>\nfor hearing,  the learned  Judge noticed that the petitioner<br \/>\nhad not\t paid the  process fee,\t as a  result of  which\t the<br \/>\nsummons could  not be  issued to  the respondent.  The Judge<br \/>\ntherefore proceeded  to dismiss\t the petition under Order 9,<br \/>\nRule 2\tof the\tCivil Procedure\t Code. Taking umbrage at the<br \/>\ndismissal of  the petition, the appellant hurled his shoe at<br \/>\nthe Judge which hit him on the shoulder. The Judge asked his<br \/>\nOrderly to  take the  appellant in custody but the appellant<br \/>\nslipped away.  The Judge  evidently wanted  to proceed under<br \/>\nsection 228  of the Penal Code for which purpose he issued a<br \/>\nwarrant of  arrest  against  the  appellant.  The  appellant<br \/>\nsuccessfully evaded  the  warrant  and\tmanaged\t to  prevent<br \/>\nproceedings being taken by the Judge for the contempt of his<br \/>\ncourt. The  Judge then made a reference to the High Court of<br \/>\nHimachal Pradesh  under section\t 15(2) of  the Act. The High<br \/>\nCourt issued  notice to\t the appellant enclosing therewith a<br \/>\ncopy of the reference made by the Judge.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The appellant did not dispute in the High Court that he<br \/>\nhurled a  shoe at  the Judge.  He explained  his conduct  by<br \/>\nsaying that he acted under an irresistible impulse generated<br \/>\nby  the\t  provocative  language\t  used\tby  the\t Judge.\t The<br \/>\nappellant&#8217;s version is like this:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t  On the  previous date\t of hearing,  the Judge\t had<br \/>\n     directed the  appellant to pay fresh process fee and to<br \/>\n     supply the\t address of  the respondent  to the Rent Act<br \/>\n     petition. The  appellant informed the Judge that he was<br \/>\n     unable to comply<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">539<\/span><br \/>\n     with that\torder since the respondent had been admitted<br \/>\n     to a  hospital and\t had since  left the  hospital.\t The<br \/>\n     house in  which the  respondent lived  was locked.\t The<br \/>\n     Judge then\t declared that\the proposed  to take  action<br \/>\n     under Order  9 Rule  2 of the Civil Procedure Code. The<br \/>\n     appellant asked the Judge to record his statement as to<br \/>\n     why he was unable to pay the process fee and supply the<br \/>\n     address of\t the respondent.  Instead of  recording\t the<br \/>\n     appellant&#8217;s statement, the Judge remarked: &#8220;You rascal,<br \/>\n     I will  set you  right&#8221;. The appellant protested at the<br \/>\n     abusive language  used by\tthe  Judge,  but  the  Judge<br \/>\n     retorted:\t&#8220;I   repeat  what  I  said&#8221;.  The  appellant<br \/>\n     thereafter lost  control over  himself  and  under\t the<br \/>\n     &#8220;extreme heat  of moment  and passion, his hand fell on<br \/>\n     his shoe&#8221; which he threw towards the dais. Many persons<br \/>\n     were present  in the  court who witnessed the incident.<br \/>\n     After hurling  the shoe at the dais, the appellant took<br \/>\n     off  his\tcoat  and   tie\t and  told  the\t court:\t &#8220;An<br \/>\n     unfortunate incident  has happened. Do you want to take<br \/>\n     any action\t against me  ? I  surrender&#8221;. Upon  this the<br \/>\n     Judge remarked:  &#8220;You scoundrel  get out  of my court&#8221;.<br \/>\n     The appellant thereafter left the court room.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>The High  Court had  called for the comments of the Judge on<br \/>\nthe version  of the  appellant, from  which it was satisfied<br \/>\nthat the  appellant was\t making a  false allegation that the<br \/>\nJudge had  used abusive language against him. The High Court<br \/>\nalso held  that the appellant had given an untrue version of<br \/>\nthe very  genesis of  the incident  since the  Judge had not<br \/>\ngiven any  direction for  furnishing the complete address of<br \/>\nthe respondent before him.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Many technical  contentions were  raised  in  the\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt, one  of them  being that\t section 10 of the Act was a<br \/>\nbar to the High Court taking cognizance of the matter. It is<br \/>\nunnecessary to\tgo into\t that question or into various other<br \/>\nmatters raised\tin the High Court on behalf of the appellant<br \/>\nsince, Shri  V. M. Tarkunde and Shri S. S. Ray who appear on<br \/>\nbehalf of the appellant, stated before us that the appellant<br \/>\ndid not desire to take a contentious attitude. It was stated<br \/>\non behalf of the appellant that he was prepared to tender an<br \/>\nunconditional written  apology to  this Court and to produce<br \/>\nevidence before\t us of his having tendered a similar apology<br \/>\nto the trial court. Such apologies have been duly tendered.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Learned counsel  appearing on  behalf of  the appellant<br \/>\nappealed to  us in  all their persuation that in view of the<br \/>\nfact that the appellant<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">540<\/span><br \/>\nwas genuinely  repentant  for  his  conduct,  he  should  be<br \/>\nenlarged on  a\tmere  admonition.  Counsel  plead  that\t the<br \/>\nappellant evidently  lost his  balance and  whether  or\t not<br \/>\nthere was  any justification  for it,  he  acted  under\t the<br \/>\nimpulse of  grave passion for which he has been sufficiently<br \/>\npunished by  the publicity  which the  incident has received<br \/>\nand the notoriety which he has invited for himself.\n<\/p>\n<p>     We had made it clear to the learned counsel at the very<br \/>\ntime when  they\t conveyed  to  us  the\twillingness  of\t the<br \/>\nappellant  to\tapologise  that\t  we  offer  no\t promise  or<br \/>\ninducement that\t if the\t appellant apologises we will take a<br \/>\nlenient view  of the matter. In our opinion the appellant is<br \/>\nguilty of conduct which is highly unbecoming of a practising<br \/>\nlawyer. He  hurled his\tshoe at the Judge in order evidently<br \/>\nto  overawe   him  and\tto  bully  him\tinto  accepting\t his<br \/>\nsubmission that the case should not be dismissed under Order<br \/>\n9 Rule\t2, C.P.C. The appellant did his best or worst to see<br \/>\nthat the  petition was\tnot  dismissed\tfor  non-payment  of<br \/>\nprocess fee  and finding  that the  Judge was not willing to<br \/>\naccept his  argument, he  took out  his shoe  in show of his<br \/>\nphysical  prowess.   We\t cannot\t  adequately   condemn\t the<br \/>\nappellant&#8217;s   behaviour\t   which   strikes    us   as\tmost<br \/>\nreprehensible, remembering  that, as a practising lawyer, he<br \/>\nis an  officer of  the\tcourt.\tSuch  incidents\t can  easily<br \/>\nmultiply considering  the devaluation  of  respect  for\t all<br \/>\nauthority, whether in law, education or politics.\n<\/p>\n<p>     We do  not, however,  propose to impose a long sentence<br \/>\nof imprisonment\t on the\t appellant, since he has tendered an<br \/>\nunconditional apology  to this\tCourt and  to learned  trial<br \/>\nJudge. The  appellant was  present in  our Court at the time<br \/>\nwhen his  appeal was  argued and  though, on such occasions,<br \/>\nhistrionics cannot  entirely be\t ruled out,  we did  form an<br \/>\nimpression, backed  by our  small little  experience of life<br \/>\nand its\t affairs, that the appellant is deeply regretful and<br \/>\ngenuinely contrite.  He has  suffered  enough  in  mind\t and<br \/>\nreputation and\tno greater  purpose is going to be served by<br \/>\nsubjecting him\tto a  long bodily suffering. Accordingly, we<br \/>\nreduce the  sentence of six months to a period of one month,<br \/>\nenhance the  fine from\tRs. 200\t to Rs. 1000 and direct that<br \/>\nthe fine,  if recovered,  shall be  paid over to a Legal Aid<br \/>\nSociety, if  any,  functioning\tin  the\t State\tof  Himachal<br \/>\nPradesh. The High Court will decide which society should get<br \/>\nthe money,  if there is more than one such society, of which<br \/>\nthere is precious little likelihood. Order accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>     We will  be failing  in our duty if before parting with<br \/>\nthe case  we did  not draw attention to what the appellant&#8217;s<br \/>\ncounsel Shri<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">541<\/span><br \/>\nBhagirath Das  said in\tthe High  Court during the course of<br \/>\nhis arguments. Shri Bhagirath Das told the learned Judges of<br \/>\nthe High Court:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t  &#8220;Better part of discretion is to ignore it instead<br \/>\n     of fanning\t it. It is a tussle between legal profession<br \/>\n     and judiciary&#8221;.  (emphasis supplied  since it must have<br \/>\n     been placed).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>This part  of the argument of the appellant&#8217;s counsel in the<br \/>\nHigh Court  is as much to be regretted as the conduct of the<br \/>\nappellant before  the learned  trial  Judge.  Discretion  is<br \/>\nundoubtedly the\t better part  of valour but we did not know,<br \/>\nuntil we  read the  argument  advanced\tby  the\t appellant&#8217;s<br \/>\ncounsel\t in   the  High\t Court,\t that  the  better  part  of<br \/>\ndiscretion is  to ignore  that\ta  practising  advocate\t had<br \/>\nhurled a  shoe at  a Judge. We are also unable to understand<br \/>\nhow the\t High Court  was &#8220;fanning&#8221;  the incident  by  taking<br \/>\ncognizance of  it, which  it was  its clear  duty to  do. It<br \/>\nmakes sorry  reading that &#8220;a tussle between legal profession<br \/>\nand judiciary&#8221;\tshould find  its culmination  in a member of<br \/>\nthat noble profession throwing a shoe at a Judge.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Those who are informed of the question and think deeply<br \/>\nupon it entertain no doubt that the Bar and the Bench are an<br \/>\nintegral  part\tof  the\t same  mechanism  which\t administers<br \/>\njustice to  the people.\t Many members of the Bench are drawn<br \/>\nfrom the  Bar and  their past  association is  a  source  of<br \/>\ninspiration and\t pride to  them. It  ought to be a matter of<br \/>\nequal pride  to the  Bar. It  is  unquestionably  true\tthat<br \/>\ncourtesy breeds courtesy and just as charity has to begin at<br \/>\nhome, courtesy\tmust begin  with the  Judge. A\tdiscourteous<br \/>\nJudge is  like an  ill-tuned instrument\t in the setting of a<br \/>\ncourtroom. But\tmembers of  the Bar will do well to remember<br \/>\nthat such  flagrant violations\tof professional\t ethics\t and<br \/>\ncultured  conduct   will  only\t result\t in   the   ultimate<br \/>\ndestruction of\ta system  without  which  no  democracy\t can<br \/>\nsurvive.\n<\/p>\n<p>     All this,\tof  course,  is\t said  without\tmeaning\t any<br \/>\ndisrespect to  Shri Bhagirath Das. Not he, but what he said,<br \/>\nis the cause of this comment.\n<\/p>\n<pre>N.V.K.\t\t\t\t      Appeal partly allowed.\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">542<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India R.K. Garg, Advocate vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 April, 1981 Equivalent citations: 1981 SCALE (1)767 Author: Y Chandrachud Bench: Chandrachud, Y.V. ((Cj) PETITIONER: R.K. GARG, ADVOCATE Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH DATE OF JUDGMENT22\/04\/1981 BENCH: CHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ) BENCH: CHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ) SEN, A.P. (J) CITATION: 1981 SCALE [&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-140872","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>R.K. Garg, Advocate vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 April, 1981 - 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\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"R.K. Garg, Advocate vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 April, 1981 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981\" \/>\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=\"1981-04-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-03-25T11:38:08+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=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"R.K. Garg, Advocate vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 April, 1981\",\"datePublished\":\"1981-04-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-25T11:38:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981\"},\"wordCount\":1773,\"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\\\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981\",\"name\":\"R.K. Garg, Advocate vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 April, 1981 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1981-04-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-03-25T11:38:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"R.K. Garg, Advocate vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 April, 1981\"}]},{\"@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":"R.K. Garg, Advocate vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 April, 1981 - 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\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"R.K. Garg, Advocate vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 April, 1981 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1981-04-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-03-25T11:38:08+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":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"R.K. Garg, Advocate vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 April, 1981","datePublished":"1981-04-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-25T11:38:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981"},"wordCount":1773,"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\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981","name":"R.K. Garg, Advocate vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 April, 1981 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1981-04-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-03-25T11:38:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-k-garg-advocate-vs-state-of-himachal-pradesh-on-22-april-1981#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"R.K. Garg, Advocate vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 22 April, 1981"}]},{"@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\/140872","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=140872"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/140872\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=140872"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=140872"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=140872"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}