{"id":151258,"date":"1995-04-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1995-04-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995"},"modified":"2018-05-08T06:28:54","modified_gmt":"2018-05-08T00:58:54","slug":"akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995","title":{"rendered":"Akhilesh Hajam vs State Of Bihar on 28 April, 1995"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Akhilesh Hajam vs State Of Bihar on 28 April, 1995<\/div>\n
Bench: G.N. Ray, Faizan Uddin<\/div>\n
           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (crl.)  540 of 1987\n\nPETITIONER:\nAKHILESH HAJAM\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF BIHAR\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 28\/04\/1995\n\nBENCH:\nG.N. RAY & FAIZAN UDDIN\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
JUDGMENT<\/p>\n
1995 SCR (3) 864<\/p>\n
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<\/p>\n
FAIZAN UDDIN, J. 1. In this appeal the appellant Akhilesh Hazam has
\nchallenged his conviction under Section 302 of the Penal Code recorded by
\nthe Sessions Judge, Rohtas, Sasram in Sessions Trial No. 30\/1981 for which
\nhe had been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. The said conviction and
\nsentence have been affirmed by Patna High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
\n630\/1982 decided on 30.9.1982.\n<\/p>\n
2. The relevant facts leading to this appeal are that on 10.10.1979 at
\nabout 4.00 PM when Somaru Dusadh, Chowkidar of village Dehlabad was going
\ntowards the east of village Dehlabad and had reached near the house of one
\nKedar, Goldsmith, he was informed by one Raja Singh that the appellant
\nafter committing the murder of his mother, sister, wife and a daughter, had
\nabsconded. On receiving this information Chowkidar, Somaru went to the
\nhouse of appellant where some persons had also assembled. The Chowkidar
\nalongwith one Ram Dev went into the house and to his amazement he found the
\ndead body of the mother of the appellant lying on a cot in a pool of blood
\nin the courtyard of the house, having injury on her hand. On the western
\nside of the varandah which was used as a kitchen, he found the dead bodies
\nof the wife and sister of the appellant lying smeared with blood having
\ninjuries on their respective heads. The daughter of the appellant was also
\nlying injured but as she was alive she was taken to the hospital for
\ntreatment but she too died later. Chowkidar Somaru left his brother Narain
\nDusadh at the spot and also called Hanif Chowkidar of village Nagadih to
\nkeep a watch over the dead bodies and thereafter he proceeded to the Police
\nStation, Rohtas where he lodged the F.I.R. at 6.30 PM stating therein that
\nhe had learned that the appellant Akhilesh had killed the victims by
\nassaulting them with an iron angle. According to the prosecution the
\nappellant after committing the murders fled away towards the village Tumba
\nand was caught near Tumba Railway Station and brought back home.\n<\/p>\n
3. The Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police visited the place of occurrence
\nand found the appellant at the door of the house where he had been kept by
\nhis father and some villagers. The Sub-Inspector from the behaviour and
\nappearance of the appellant took an impression that he was under the
\ninfluence of some intoxicate and, therefore, after arresting the appellant
\nhe sent him to Akbarpur hospital for his medical examination. The doctor
\nwho examined the appellant indicated in his report, Ext. 7 that there was
\nno symptom of poisoning and the appellant was in normal mental state.\n<\/p>\n
4.  On interrogation by the Sub-Inspector of Police the appellant is said
\nto have made disclosure statement with regard to the concealment of an iron
\nangle which is said to have been used as a weapon in the commission of four
\nmurders. According to the prosecution the said iron angle stained with
\nblood was recovered and seized from beneath the heap of wood stored for
\nfuel purposes in a room of the house at the instance of the appellant. The
\nAsstt. Sub-Inspector of Police held local inspection and prepared inquest
\nreports in respect of the dead bodies, seized the blood stained earth and
\nprepared a sketch map of the place of occurrence. Autopsy was conducted
\nover the dead bodies and the reports were received.\n<\/p>\n
5. The appellant was sent up for trial under Section 302 of the Penal Code.
\nThe appellant adjured his guilt and pleaded to be tried. The prosecution
\nexamined as many as 12 witnesses but they did not support the prosecution
\ncase. However, the trial court relying on the circumstantial evidence
\nrecorded the finding of guilt against the appellant and, therefore,
\nconvicted the appellant under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to
\nsuffer life imprisonment. The High Court also found favour with the view
\nexpressed by the learned Trial Judge and, therefore, affirmed the
\nconviction and sentence.\n<\/p>\n
6.  Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the
\nprosecution tried to introduce some evidence to show that the appellant was
\nunder intoxication and pretended as if he had become a person of unsound
\nmind with a view to escape the guilt and sentenced that may be awarded to
\nhim which fact has been falsified by the medical report, Ext. P.7 which
\nindicated that there was no symptom of poisoning and the appellant was
\nfound in normal mental state. He also submitted that the appellant was very
\nmuch present in the village but the prosecution has vainly tried to show
\nthat he had absconded while in fact he was arrested in the village itself.
\nLearned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the evidence with
\nregard to the disclosure statement and seizure of blood stained iron angle
\nis not worthy of reliance and even if it is accepted the conviction of the
\nappellant could not be based on the sole circumstances of recovery of iron
\nangle. It was submitted that there are no eye-witnesses to the incident and
\nin the absence of any evidence of motive the circumstantial evidence does
\nnot complete the chain so as to lead to the only conclusion that the
\nappellant and none-else was the murderer of his mother, wife, sister and
\ndaughter.\n<\/p>\n
7.  In the present case admittedly, there are no eye-witnesses to the
\nincident and the conviction of the appellant solely rests on the
\ncircumstantial evidence. It may be stated that the standard of proof
\nrequired to convict a person on circumstantial evidence is now well settled
\nby a series of pronouncements of this Court. According to the standard
\nenunciated by this Court the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution
\nin support of the case must not only be fully established but the chain of
\nevidence furnished by those circumstances must be so complete as not to
\nleave any reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with the innocence
\nof the accused. The circumstances from which the conclusion of the guilt of
\nan accused is to be inferred, should be of conclusive nature and consistent
\nonly with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and the same should
\nnot be capable of being explained by any other hypothesis, except the guilt
\nof the accused and when all the circumstances cumulatively taken together
\nlead to the only irresistable conclusion that the accused alone is the
\nperpetrator of the crime. In the present case the Trial Court as well as
\nthe High Court founded the conviction of the appellant on the basis of the
\ncircumstances which are said to be established against the appellant and
\nthe same are set out herein below :\n<\/p>\n
(1) All the four deceased persons were alive on 10.10.1979 at 7.30 AM
\nwhen PW 5, father of the appellant had left the house for Amjore.\n<\/p>\n
(2)  The four victims were found murdered at about 2.00 PM in the house in
\nwhich the appellant also lived with his father and the victims.\n<\/p>\n
(3) In between the period from 7.30 to 4.00 PM  there was no alarm of theft
\nor dacoity in the house and they had no enmity with any person which rules
\nbut the possibility of the   commission of the murder by any other person.\n<\/p>\n
(4)  The accused was found absconding from his house soon after the murder
\nwho was subsequently caught outside the village and brought at the door of
\nthe house at about 4 PM.\n<\/p>\n
(5)  When the appellant was with his father and other witnesses, the
\nAssist. Sub-Inspector of Police arrived and noticed the appellant as if he
\nwas  under the influence of some intoxication.\n<\/p>\n
(6)  Although four members of his family including his wife and daughter
\nwere murdered the appellant did not go to see them and remained outside his
\nhouse.\n<\/p>\n
(7)  On the disclosure statement made by the appellant the blood stained
\niron angle was recovered and seized at the instance of the appellant from
\nthe room of the house concealed beneath the fuel wood stored therein.\n<\/p>\n
8. The question for consideration arises whether the aforementioned
\ncircumstances are proved beyond all reasonable doubt and if so whether they
\nprovide so complete a chain as not to leave any reasonable ground for a
\nconclusion consistent with the innocence of the appellant. In other words,
\nwhether the circumstances said to be established are of the conclusive
\nnature and consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the
\nappellant and the same are not capable of being explained by any other
\nhypothesis, except the guilt of the appellant which if taken cumulatively
\ntogether lead to the only irresistable conclusion that the appellant alone
\nis the perpetrator of the crime.\n<\/p>\n
9.  A perusal of the prosecution evidence goes to show that in all
\nprobability the four murders took place before 2.00 PM because the dead
\nbodies of all the four victims were seen by the hostile witness PW 4 at
\nabout 2.00 PM. According to the medical evidence of the Medical Officer. PW
\n11 who performed an autopsy over the dead bodies on 11.10.1979 from 4.40 PM
\nonwards deposed that the deaths had taken place more than 24 hours from the
\ntime when he performed the post-mortem. It is true that there is evidence
\nof PW 2, PW 4 and PW 5 to the effect that the victims were alive at 7.30 AM
\nbut there is no definite evidence as to till what time they were seen alive
\nby the prosecution witnesses. But one thing is definitely clear that the
\nmurders had taken place sometimes before 2.00 PM. It is also not clear from
\nthe prosecution evidence that the appellant remained in the house alongwith
\nthe victims right from 7.30 AM till 2.00 PM during which the murders were
\ncommitted. On the contrary PW 4 clearly stated that when he visited the
\nplace of occurrence Akhilesh Hajam was not seen there. Admittedly the
\nappellant had no motive to commit the ghastly crime of his own mother,
\nsister, wife and daughter and simply because the family had not enmity with
\nanyone in the village or that there was no alarm of any theft or dacoity in
\nthe house during the said period, it would not lead to the only inference
\nthat nobody else could have committed the murders except the appellant in
\nthe absence of any positive evidence that the appellant remained at the
\nhouse alongwith the victims continuously from 7.30 AM to 2.00 PM on the
\ndate of occurrence. That being so, it would be unsafe and unreasonable to
\ndraw an inference that the appellant alone is the perpetrator of the crime.\n<\/p>\n
10.  The evidence that the appellant had absconded soon after the murders
\nis also shaky and uncertain. According to PW 4 the appellant was not
\npresent in the house but he was seen going towards village Tumba station
\nand according to the evidence of PW 2, Village Tumba is only one mile away
\nfrom village Dehlabad where occurrence took place. That means both the
\nvillages are situated closely to each other. From this evidence it cannot
\nbe inferred that appellant had absconded after the occurrence. The evidence
\nshow that the appellant was found in the village itself from where he was
\ntaken by some of the witnesses to the house and detained at the door of the
\nhouse till the arrival of the police. If in fact the appellant had any
\nintention to disappear from the scene or from the village itself to avoid
\nhis arrest then nothing prevented him to leave the village to some unknown
\nplace but there is no evidence suggesting that the appellant had left the
\nvillage at all. All that comes but from the evidence on record is that the
\nappellant was not found in the house but was found roaming about in the
\nvillage for which there may be more than one reasons. The possibility
\ncannot be ruled out that in the absence of the appellant someone com-mitted
\nthe ghastly murders and when the appellant stepped into the house and found
\nthe dead bodies of his near and dear he became dumb founded and temporarily
\nlost the balance and equilibrium of his mind as is clear from the
\nprosecution evidence. PW 4 also deposed that the appellant had fallen down
\nnear the boring of one Deoratan Singh. Almost all the wit-nesses including
\nthe Asstt. Sub-Inspector of Police have deposed that the appellant was
\nshowing the behaviour of a person under the influence of some intoxication
\nand looked as if the had lost his senses. It was for this reason that the
\npolice had sent the appellant first to the hospital for examination by the
\nMedical Officer as to his mental state. It appears that the appellant was
\nnot in a position to walk due to mental imbalance as he was taken on a cot
\nto the hospital.\n<\/p>\n
11. As regards the seizure of blood stained iron angle on the basis of
\ndisclosure statement said to have been made by the appellant the same is
\nalso not free from doubt. According to the prosecution the appellant made
\nthe disclosure statement that he had kept the iron angle in the room
\nconcealed beneath the fuel wood which was used as a weapon of offence but
\naccording to the statement of PW 6 the witness of disclosure and seizure of
\nthe alleged iron angle the same was not found concealed beneath the fuel
\nwood in the room but the iron angle was found in the varandah which is an
\nopen and accessable place. Such a seizure from an open and accessable place
\ncan hardly be said to be a recovery on the basis of disclosure statement.
\nIt is therefore, difficult to accept that the seizure of iron angle was on
\nthe basis of the disclosure statement made by the appellant. Even if the
\niron angle would have been recovered from a concealed place then also on
\nthe basis of this circumstance of recovery alone, in the absence of any
\nreport of Serologist as to the present of human blood on the same the
\nconviction of the appellant could not be founded. Thus, in our considered
\nopinion, the circumstantial evidence discussed above does not conclusively
\nlead to the only irresistable conclusion that the appellant was the
\nperpetrator of the crime and none else. The prosecution case does not
\ntravel beyond the realm of doubt, the benefit of which has to be given to
\nthe appellant.\n<\/p>\n
12. From the tenor of the evidence adduced by the prosecution it can well
\nbe seen that there has been a deliberate venture and an attempt of the
\nwitnesses to favour the appellant and it becomes clear that the witnesses
\ndid not come out with the truth and tried to suppress the material facts to
\ndeflect the course of justice for reason best known to them. On going
\nthrough the prosecution evidence though it appears to us that in all
\nprobability the appellant may be the culprit but probabilities and moral
\nconvictions have no place or any role to play to convict a person in the
\nabsence of legal evidence. There is a long distance to be travelled between
\nthe expression “may be” and “must be”. However strong——- emotional
\nconsiderations may be, but the same cannot take the place of proof. It is
\nindeed unfortunate that four innocent persons lost their lives and the
\nculprit whosoever he may be goes unpunished. But it would be still worse if
\na innocent person is held responsible for the same merely on the basis of
\nstrong and serious doubts and, therefore, the conviction of the appellant
\ndeserves to be set aside by giving him the benefit of doubt.\n<\/p>\n
13.  For the reasons stated above the appeal succeeds and is hereby
\nallowed. The conviction of the appellant under Section 302 with sentence
\nthereunder is set aside. It is directed that the appellant shall be set at
\nliberty if not required in any other offence.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Akhilesh Hajam vs State Of Bihar on 28 April, 1995 Bench: G.N. Ray, Faizan Uddin CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 540 of 1987 PETITIONER: AKHILESH HAJAM RESPONDENT: STATE OF BIHAR DATE OF JUDGMENT: 28\/04\/1995 BENCH: G.N. RAY & FAIZAN UDDIN JUDGMENT: JUDGMENT 1995 SCR (3) 864 The Judgment of the Court was […]<\/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-151258","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nAkhilesh Hajam vs State Of Bihar on 28 April, 1995 - 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\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Akhilesh Hajam vs State Of Bihar on 28 April, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995\" \/>\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=\"1995-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-08T00:58:54+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\\\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Akhilesh Hajam vs State Of Bihar on 28 April, 1995\",\"datePublished\":\"1995-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-08T00:58:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995\"},\"wordCount\":2632,\"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\\\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995\",\"name\":\"Akhilesh Hajam vs State Of Bihar on 28 April, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1995-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-08T00:58:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Akhilesh Hajam vs State Of Bihar on 28 April, 1995\"}]},{\"@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":"Akhilesh Hajam vs State Of Bihar on 28 April, 1995 - 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\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Akhilesh Hajam vs State Of Bihar on 28 April, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1995-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-08T00:58:54+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\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Akhilesh Hajam vs State Of Bihar on 28 April, 1995","datePublished":"1995-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-08T00:58:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995"},"wordCount":2632,"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\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995","name":"Akhilesh Hajam vs State Of Bihar on 28 April, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1995-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-08T00:58:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/akhilesh-hajam-vs-state-of-bihar-on-28-april-1995#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Akhilesh Hajam vs State Of Bihar on 28 April, 1995"}]},{"@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\/151258","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=151258"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/151258\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=151258"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=151258"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=151258"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}