{"id":153318,"date":"2000-01-19T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2000-01-18T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000"},"modified":"2016-10-03T09:02:59","modified_gmt":"2016-10-03T03:32:59","slug":"shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000","title":{"rendered":"Shri Avtar Singh Hit And Ors. vs The Delhi State And Ors. on 19 January, 2000"},"content":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court<\/div>\n
Shri Avtar Singh Hit And Ors. vs The Delhi State And Ors. on 19 January, 2000<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 2000 IVAD Delhi 750, AIR 2000 Delhi 196, 84 (2000) DLT 781, 2000 (53) DRJ 746<\/div>\n
Author: C Nayar<\/div>\n
Bench: C Nayar<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
C.M. Nayar, J.<\/p>\n
1.     This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution  of India  for quashing the proceedings which took place in the second  meeting convened  to  elect members of the Executive Board of Delhi  Sikh  Gurdwara Management  Committee  (for  short ‘DSGMC’) held on May 12,  1999  and  for declaration of the same as illegal and non est. <\/p>\n
2.   Notice of the meeting was issued on April 21, 1999 by the President S. Jaswant Singh Sethi. The said notice reads as follows :\n<\/p>\n
      \"2564\/3-1                          Dt. 21.4.1999\n \n\n     All the Members \n\n     Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee. \n \n\n     Dear Sir, \n \n\n     Waheguru ji ka Khalsa\n \n\n     Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh\n \n\n<\/pre>\n
     A  meeting  of the Executive of Delhi  Sikh  Gurdwara  Management Committee will be held on Wednesday, the 12th May, 1999 at 11  AM in  the  office  of Delhi Sikh  Gurudwara  Management  Committee, Gurdwara  Rakab  Ganj Sahib, New Delhi to discuss  the  following agenda.\n<\/p>\n
     AGENDA<\/p>\n
     Election  of  the  Office-bearers and Members  of  the  Executive Committee.\n<\/p>\n
     Kindly attend the meeting in time.\n<\/p>\n
     With regards.\n<\/p>\n
     Yours Sincerely,  <\/p>\n
     (JASWANT SINGH SETHI) <\/p>\n
     President<\/p>\n
     Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management <\/p>\n
     Committee”\n<\/p>\n
3.   The  provisions which are relevant for the purposes of  resolving  the present  controversy between the parties as contained in Sections 3, 4,  5, 11,  12, 13 and 17 of The Delhi Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1971  (hereinafter  referred to as ‘the Act’) may be reproduced as below :\n<\/p>\n
     “3.  Incorporation  of the Committee. – (1) With the effect  from such  date as the Central Government may, by notification in  the Official  Gazette, appoint, there shall be established  Committee to be called the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee for the proper  management  and  control of the  Gurdwaras  and  Gurdwara property.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (2)  The Committee shall be a body corporate with the name aforesaid  having perpetual succession and a common seal and shall  by such name sue and be sued.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (3)  The Committee shall have its head office in Delhi.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
4.   Composition of the Committee. – The Committee shall consist of –\n<\/p>\n
     (a)  forty-six  members  to be elected from  various  wards  into which Delhi shall be divided in accordance with the provisions of this Act;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (b)  nine  members to be co-opted by the elected members  of  the Committee  referred  to in clause (a) in the manner  hereinafter appearing –\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (i)  two  members  to represent the registered  Singh  Sabhas  of Delhi  who shall be chosen by drawing of lots out of  the  Presidents of those registered Singh Sabhas;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (ii) four  members, each being the head priest of the :  (1)  Sri Akal Takhat Sahib, Amritsar, (2) Sri Takhat Kesgarh Sahib, Anandpur, (3), Sri Takhat Patna Sahib, Patna, and (4) Sri Takhat Hazur Sahib, Nanded :\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Provided that the head priest shall have no right to vote for the purpose  of election of office-bearers and other members  of  the Executive  Board  under sub-section (1) and  sub-section  (2)  of Section 16;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (iii)  one  member, being the nominee of the  Shiromani  Gurdwara
\n     Probandhank Committee, Amritsar.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (iv) two members to represent the Sikh Community of Delhi,  other than  those  referred to in sub-clause (i), sub-clause  (ii)  and sub-clause  (iii), to be chosen in accordance with the system  of proportional  representation  by means of a  single  transferable vote.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     5.  Term  of  office. – (1) Save as otherwise  provided  in  this section, the term of office of a member of the Committee shall be four  years and shall commence from the date on which  the  first meeting of the Committee is held under Section 15, and no longer.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (2)  When  a  vacancy  occurs in the Committee  owing  to  death, resignation, removal or otherwise of a member, a new member shall be  elected  or co-opted, as the case may be, in  the  manner  in which  the member whose seat is to be filled was elected  or  coopted and every such member shall continue to hold office so long only as the member in whose place he is elected or co-opted would have  been  entitled to hold office, if the vacancy had  not  occurred.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (3)  An outgoing member shall continue in office until the  notification  of election or co-option of his successor is  published under Section 12.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     11. Elections. – Election of members under clause (a) of  Section 4  whether for the purpose of initial constitution  of  committee under  section 3, or for filling vacancies arising by  efflux  of time  or  a casual vacancy, shall be conducted  by  the  Director Gurdwara  Elections  in accordance with the rules  made  in  this behalf.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Provided that no election shall be held to fill a casual  vacancy occurring  within four months prior to the holding of  a  general election under this section.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     12.  Publication  of  results.  – (1) The names  of  all  persons elected as a member of the Committee shall, as may be, after such election  be published by the Director Gurdwara Elections in  the manner prescribed by rules.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (2)  The names of all persons co-opted as member under clause (b) of section 4 shall likewise be published by the Director Gurdwara Elections in the manner prescribed by rules.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     13.  Director  Gurdwara Elections. – (1) The  Central  Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint a  suitable person  to be the Director Gurdwara Elections in whom shall  vest the superintendence, direction and control of the preparation  of electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, elections of members  of the Committee.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (2)  A person shall not be qualified for appointment as  Director Gurdwara Elections unless he is a citizen of India and  possesses judicial  or administrative experience for a period of  not  less than ten years.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (3)  Subject to the provisions of section 37, the term of office, and the terms and conditions of service of the Director  Gurdwara Elections shall be such as may be prescribed by rules.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     17.  Vacation,  resignation  and removal of members  and  office-    bearers. - (1) A member of the Committee may resign his office by writing under his hand addressed to the President. \n \n\n     (2)  An office-bearer or any other member of the Executive Board-\n \n\n     (a)  shall  vacate his office if he ceases to be a member of  the Committee; \n \n\n     (b)  may  at any time by writing under his hand addressed to  the Committee resign his office; and \n \n\n     (c)  may  be removed from his office by a resolution of the  Committee  passed  by a three-fourth majority of the  total  members thereof : \n \n\n<\/pre>\n
     Provided  that no resolution for the purpose of clause (c)  shall be  moved unless it is supported by not less than seventeen  members of the Committee and fourteen days’ notice has been given of their intention to move the resolution.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (3)  The  resignation of office under sub-section (1)  or  clause (b)  of  sub-section (2) shall be effective from  the  date  from  which it is accepted by the Executive Board or the  Committee, as the case may be.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
4.   The  meeting which was to be held under the Presidents of  S.  Jaswant Singh  Sethi commenced at the scheduled time. However, there was some  sort of pandemonium before the process of elections commenced and the  President S.  Jaswant  Singh  Sethi adjourned the meeting for fear  of  violence  and disturbances.  The communication sent to the Observers as appointed by  the Government  was sent promptly on the same day and it may be  reproduced  as below :\n<\/p>\n
     “Delhi  Sikh  Gurdwara  Management Committee  Guru  Gobind  Singh Bhawan, Gurdwara Rakab Ganj, New Delhi 110001.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
      Ref. No. 3075\/3-1             Dated 12.5.1999\n \n\n     S.B.S. Sahni \n\n     S. Inder Mohan Singh  \n\n     Observers \n\n     Gurdwara Elections \n\n     Vikas Sadan : New Delhi\n \n\n     Dear Sirs, \n \n\n<\/pre>\n
     As  you  are aware that in the presence of Holy Sri  Guru  Granth Sahib,  both  the parties of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara  Management Committee,  have  not kept thesanity of Holy  Sri  Guru  Granth Sahib in spite of my repeated requests. The Members of DSGMC also mishandled the Respected Jathedar, Sri Akal Takhat Sahib S. Puran Singh  Ji. Some Members of DSGMC did not allow me to conduct  the General Elections properly and legally.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     I,  therefore, adjourned the meeting, fearing violence  and  disturbances, till further orders.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     This is for your kind information.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Thanking you, <\/p>\n
     Yours Sincerely, <\/p>\n
     Sd\/-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (JASWANT SINGH SETHI) <\/p>\n
     PRESIDENT <\/p>\n
     DELHI SIKH GURDWARA MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     The office of the Committee of DSGMC was also stated to be closed for half day after 2 P.M. on May 12, 1999. The Press release  was issued  by  the President dated May 12, 1999 which  is  filed  as Annexure XIII to the writ petition and makes the following  reading :\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     “PRESS RELEASE <\/p>\n
     ELECTIONS OF EXECUTIVE BOARD OF DSGMC POSTPONED<\/p>\n
     The Meeting of the General House of Delhi Sikh, Gurdwara  Management Committee which was convened to elect the Executive Board of Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee has been postponed.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     S.  Jaswant Singh Sethi President Delhi Sikh Gurdwara  Management Committee explained that during the Meeting, Members of  opposite Group initiated violence and resorted to physical assault in  the Holy  presence  of Sri Guru Granth Sahib and  Jathedar  Sri  Akal Takhat Sahib – Giani Puran Singh Ji.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Apprehending  violence, physical attack and arson and  to  uphold the sanctity of Holy Sri Guru Granth Sahib, the Meeting of GENERAL HOUSE OF DSGMC has been postponed and duly intimated to  officials observers of Gurdwara Elections, as per enclosed letter.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Sd\/-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (JASWANT SINGH SETHI) <\/p>\n
     PRESIDENT <\/p>\n
     DELHI SIKH GURDWARA MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE”.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
5. The petitioners have also filed copies of photographs as well as torn ballot papers as Annexure X (collectively) to the writ petition to indicate that the situation was tense and fair and free elections could not take place. The meeting of the Executive Committee was deemed to be postponed by the President. On the above basis it is contended by the petitioners that the meeting for electing the office bearers and members of Executive Committee having been postponed neither any election was possible nor it was held by the respondents. This is the short question which is the subject matter of challenge in the present petition.\n<\/p>\n
6. The respondents have filed their respective counter affidavits and have vehemently assailed the conduct of the petitioners and have argued that no petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable as it raises disputed questions of fact. The elections were validly held by majority of members after nominations were duly invited. The allegations of violence were also denied. The petitioners are provided with an efficacious alternative remedy under Section 32 of the Act and the Court of District Judge in Delhi shall alone have the jurisdiction in respect of the elections and any person aggrieved by the orders passed by District Judge can file an appeal under Section 33 of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
7. The main contention of learned counsel for the petitioners is that no valid elections took place as the meeting was postponed due to fear of violence as the disturbances had already started taking place. There was, therefore, no valid election as contemplated by the provisions of the Act. The learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand have contended that as S. Jaswant Singh Sethi left the meeting in between as he found no support for his candidature, the remaining members gave the power of the President to the Senior Vice President who conducted the elections and was responsible for electing the office bearers. In the absence of the President, it is contended, it is open for the members to elect another Chairman and continue the meeting as the meeting cannot be postponed at all costs. In the present situation the Senior Vice President supervised the recording of the meeting and the election was, therefore, validly conducted. In this regard reference is made to the judgments reported as Smith Vs. Raringa Mines, Limited, 1906 Vol. II The Law Reports (Chancery Division) page 193; S.RM. S.T. Narayana Chettiar and another Vs. The Kaleeswarar Mills Ltd. and Others,  to reiterate that the Directors of a limited Company, in absence of express authority in the Article of Association, have no power to postpone the meeting properly convened and it is not open for the Chairman to stop the meeting and dissolve it before the business of the meeting is finished. Reference is also made to the judgment reported as John Vs. Rees and others, 1969 Vol. 2 The All England Law Reports page 274. This judgment deals with the powers of the Chairman to continue or to adjourn the meeting. The following passages from pages 292 and 293 may be of relevance in the facts and circumstances of the case which are reproduced as under :\n<\/p>\n
 “Although the Lambeth case (47) is of no great assistance in this case, it did, by devious means, ultimately lead me to what I think is a useful passage in a book published in 1840. A PRACTICAL ARRANGEMENT OF ECCLESIASTICAL LAW, by F.N. ROGERS, Q.C. In discussing vestry meetings at p. 874, the author considers Stoughton Vs. Reynolds (48), and then says that this decision –\n<\/p>\n
 “by no means interferes with the right which every chairman has to make a bona fide adjournment, whilst a poll or other business is proceeding, if circumstances of violent interruption make it unsafe, or seriously difficult for the voters to tender their votes; nor of adjourning the place of polling, if the ordinary place used for that purpose be insufficient, or greatly inconvenient. In most of such cases, the question will turn upon the intention and effect of the adjournment, if the intention and effect were to interrupt and procrastinate the business, such an adjournment would be illegal; if, on the contrary, the intention and effect were to forward or facilitate it, and no injurious effect were produced, such an adjournment would, it is conceived, be generally supported.”\n<\/p>\n
 This seems to me sound sense. It does not appear to be inconsistent with any of the authorities, and in its essentials I adopt it for the purposes of this judgment. I do not think it can be right to say that the chairman of a meeting has no inherent power to adjourn the meeting for disorder. It seems generally accepted that one of his functions is to preserve order: if despite his efforts serious disorder persists, and he is denied any power of adjournment, what is he to do? The disorder will almost by necessity make it impossible for the meeting to pass a resolution for adjournment. One must remember that serious disorder may put in a dilemma many of those who are peacefully attending the meeting. If they retire from it, they may afterwards find that the disorder soon subsided, and that the meeting then transacted its business without their voice and vote, and in a sense contrary to their wishes. If they remain, their personal safety may be in peril. The frail and timorous are as much entitled as the robust and bold to a meeting to which they can give their attention, and at which they may make their voices heard without fear of violence; and they need it more.\n<\/p>\n
 The first duty of the Chairman of a meeting is to keep order if he can. If there is disorder, his duty, I think, is to make earnest and sustained efforts to restore order, and for this purpose to summon to his aid any officers or others whose assistance is available. If all his efforts are in vain, he should endeavour to put into operation whatever provisions for adjournment these are in the rules, as by obtaining a resolution to adjourn. If this proves impossible, he should exercise his inherent power to adjourn the meeting for a short while, such as 15 minutes, taking due steps to ensure so far as possible that all present know of this adjournment. If instead of mere disorder there is violence, I think that he should take similar steps, save that the greater the violence the less prolonged should be his efforts to restore order before adjourning. In my judgment, he has not merely a power but a duty to adjourn in this way, in the interests of those who fear for their safety. I am not suggesting that there is a power and a duty to adjourn if the violence consists of no more than a few technical assaults and batteries. Mere pushing and jostling is one thing; it is another when people are put in fear, where there is heavy punching, or the knives are out, so that blood may flow, and there are prospects, or more, of grievous bodily harm. In the latter case, the sooner the chairman adjourns the meeting the better. At meetings, as elsewhere, the Queen’s Peace must be kept.\n<\/p>\n
 If, then, the Chairman has this inherent power and duty, what limitations, if any, are there on its exercise? First, I think that the power and duty must be exercised bona fide for the purpose of forwarding and facilitating the meeting, and not for the purpose of interruption or procrastination. Second, I think that the adjournment must be for no longer than the necessities appear to dictate. If the adjournment is merely for such period as the chairman considers to be reasonably necessary for the restoration of order, it would be within his power and his duty; a longer adjournment would not. One must remember that to attend a meeting may for some mean travelling far and giving up much leisure. An adjournment to another day when a mere 15 minutes might suffice to restore order may well impose an unjustifiable burden on many; for they must either once more travel far and give up their leisure, or else remain away and lose their change to speak and vote at the meeting.”\n<\/p>\n
8. The next point which has been highlighted by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents is that petitioners are provided with an alternative efficacious remedy in the nature of Election Petition under Section 32 of the Act and they can resort to the same and no interference is called for in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The judgments reported in this regard are K.K. Shrivastava etc. Vs. Bhupendra Kumar Jain and Others,  and Babu Verghese and Others Vs. Bar Council of Kerala and others (1999) a Supreme Court Cases 422.\n<\/p>\n
9. Strong reliance has been placed on the Division Bench judgment of this Court reported as Gurdeep Singh Dua and Others Vs. Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Prabandhak Committe, 1995 I AD(Delhi) 579 by learned counsel for the petitioners to state the proposition that where the proceedings of the meeting held for the conduct of elections were not held properly and were not independent the same could be set aside by this Court. The facts as arisen in that petition as well as the law laid down are stated in paragraphs 13, 14 and 15 which may be reproduced as below :-\n<\/p>\n
“13. In this petition we are not at all considering, nor it is our function to so consider, the authority of the Jathedar Sahib Shri Akal Takht, Amritsar. Our consideration only is the conduct of the members of the Committee having right to vote. By a bare reading of the minutes of 10th May, 1994 and 21st May, 1994 and portion of the counter-affidavit set out above it is clear to us that the elections have not been held in accordance with law and the Rules. The Committee, as noted above, is a statutory body and law prescribes the functions of the office-bearers and the Executive Board which consists of ten members. It also prescribes how the elections of the President, Senior Vice President, Junior Vice President, General Secretary, Joint Secretary and each of the ten members of the Executive Board are to be held. That right is to be exercised by the members of the Committee themselves and they cannot abdicate their functions in favour of any one in violation of law under which they had been elected from the respective wards into which Delhi has been divided. Members of the Committee are not members of some association of persons or voluntary organisations where they can authorise a person to make nominations on their behalf. Here the member of the Committee have to act under the law making them members of the Committee and elected representatives of the persons. Under sub-section (6) of Section 16, the election of the President and other office- bearers and members of the Executive Board shall be held in such manner as may be prescribed by the Rules. Under sub-section (3) of Section 19, the President, or in his absence the Senior Vice-President and in the absence of both, the Junior Vice-President, and in the absence of all the three, any other member elected from amongst themselves shall preside at any meeting of the Committee or of the Executive Board. Under Section 21, powers of the Executive Board and its office-bearers are prescribed. Under section 36, every member of the Committee and the Executive Board and all other sub-committees, etc. shall be deemed to be a public servant within the meaning of Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code. Under Rule 8, when a member of the Committee is to be elected as President, Senior Vice-President, Junior Vice-President, General Secretary or the Joint Secretary, the President shall call upon the members present at the meeting to nominate candidates for the purpose. Any member present may propose the name of any other member of the Committee for the office of President or for other offices of the Executive Board and if any other member present seconds such a proposal the President shall if the person so proposed agrees to such nomination in case he is present in the meeting or the member proposing the name produces a certificate signed by the person so nominated to the effect that he agrees to such nomination. Under rule 9, if only one member is nominated as a candidate under the provisions of rule 8, he shall be deemed and shall be declared to have been elected as President, Senior Vice-President, Junior Vice-President, General Secretary and the Joint Secretary, as the case may be, Rule 10 provides for a situation where there are more than one member nominated for an office. Under Rule 12, similar procedure has been prescribed for election of members of the Executive Board. If we now refer to the minutes of 21st May, 1994, we find that the moment Mr. Manjit Singh Calcutta is elected President, Bhaiya Gurbachan Singh, who was presiding over the meeting, gives his place to Mr. Manjit Singh Calcutta who thereafter conducts a meeting and calls for nominations of other office-bearers and the members of the Executive Board. This he could not have done and Bhaiya Gurbachan Singh had to conduct whole of the meeting and call for nominations. Then the minutes do not show that any consent of the office-bearers and the members of the Executive Board so nominated was obtained before declaration of their respective results. Election of ten members of the Executive Board has also not been in accordance with the Rules. There has been no nomination, no recondition and no mention of any member agreeing to the nomination to the Executive Board. The minutes are signed by the newly elected President and the General Secretary. This again is not in accordance with the practice as the minutes should have been signed by the outgoing President and General Secretary as the minutes had to be confirmed in the subsequent meeting. As Vice-President, the minutes should have been signed by Bhaiya Gurbachan Singh. We find it is a case where exceptional and extraordinary circumstances exist for us to interfere in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. We may also note that an affidavit has been filed by Bhaiya Gurbachan Singh, aged about 92 years, that he is a member of the Committee since 1979 and that he attended the meeting of the Committee on 21st May, 1994. He denied that being the Vice-President of the Committee he was elected as President to conduct the proceedings of the General House on 21st May, 1994 and that the proceedings of the General House started under his Chairman-ship. He says the minutes contained a totally false and incorrect record of the proceedings. We are, however, not going into that question and we have principally proceeded on the basis that Bhaiya Gurbachan Singh being the Junior Vice-President was elected as President for the meeting of 21st May, 1994.\n<\/p>\n
 14. We, therefore, hold that the elections as per the minutes dated 10th May, 1994 and 21st May, 1994 are not in accordance with law and have to be set aside. We order accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
 15. Having said so we must find a method to have the elections of the office-bearers and the Executive Board in accordance with law. It is unfortunate that there has been a constant dispute between the warring groups and various court cases are pending.”\n<\/p>\n
10. The facts as narrated above are similar to the facts which arise for consideration in the present case. The alleged meeting which commenced under the Presidentship of S. Jaswant Singh Sethi 52 members were stated to be present as stated in the Minutes of the meeting as drawn after purported elections having taken place. The operative part of the English Translation of the Minutes may be reproduced as below :\n<\/p>\n
  “While beginning the proceedings, S. Jaswant Singh Sethi President DSGMC stated that today’s General Body Meeting is being held to elect the office-bearers and Members of the Executive Board. As per Gurdwara Act, the previous executive is dissolved. I request the Members present to propose the names for the post of President Prof. Joginder Singh proposed the name of S. Paramjit Singh Sarna for President and S. Manjit Singh Greater Kailash Seconded the name. Then more names were invited. S. Avtar Singh Hit proposed the name of S. Jaswant Singh Sethi and it was seconded by S. Kuldip Singh Bhogal. When the voting was to begin, S. Jaswant Singh Sethi walked out of the meeting.”\n<\/p>\n
11. After S. Jaswant Singh Sethi left the meeting, the proceedings of the meeting were stated to have continued under the Presidentship of S. Gurcharan Singh Gatka Master, Senior Vice-President in the presence of 24 other members. The election was alleged to be held in the presence of only 25 members and the following portion from the translated Minutes may now be reproduced as below:\n<\/p>\n
 “S. Gurcharan Singh Gatka Master requested the Members present, to propose the names for the President of DSGMC. Prof. Joginder Singh proposed the name of S. Paramjit Singh Sarna for President and it was seconded by S. Manjit Singh Greater Kailash. Then more names were invited for the post of President. As no other name was proposed, S. Paramjit Singh Sarna was unanimously elected President of DSGMC. Thereafter, S. Paramjit Singh Sarna assumed Presidentship of the Meeting, the further proceedings of the meetings were performed under his presidentship.\n<\/p>\n
 S. Paramjit Singh Sarna invited name for the post of Sr. Vice President, S. Manjit Singh Greater Kailash, proposed the name of S. Nirwair Singh, which was seconded by S. Harmohinder Singh. As no other name was proposed, therefore S. Nirwair Singh was unanimously elected Sr. Vice-President.\n<\/p>\n
 Thereafter, S. Paramjit Singh Sarna invited names for Jr. Vice-President S. Bhajan Singh Walia proposed the name of Jathedar Baldev Singh Rani Bagh which was seconded by Prof. Harmoinder Singh. Then more names were invited as no other name was proposed, Jathedar Baldev Singh Rani Bagh was unanimously elected Jr. Vice President.\n<\/p>\n
 Then S. Paramjit Singh Sarna invited names for the post of Gen. Secy. S. Gurcharan Singh Sabharwal proposed the name of S. Jatinder Singh Sahni which was seconded by Prof. Joginder Singh. Then more names were invited for the post of Gen. Secretary. But no other name was proposed, therefore, S. Jatinder Singh Sahni was elected unanimously as Gen. Secretary.\n<\/p>\n
 After the President invited the names for the post of Jt. Secretary S. Bhajan Singh Walia proposed the name of S. Kuldip Singh Karol Bagh which was seconded by S. Mangal Singh. As no other name was proposed. S. Kuldip Singh Karol Bagh was unanimously elected Jt. Secy.\n<\/p>\n
 After the elections of the Office-bearers, the President invited names for the members of the Executive Board. The following ten members who are proposed and seconded by the following persons were declared elected unanimously.\n<\/p>\n
      S.   NAME                PROPOSED BY         SECONDED BY\n     No.\n     1.   S. BALBIR SINGH     S. Manjit Singh     Bibi Daljit Kaur\n                              Greater Kailash     Khalsa\n     2.   S.L.S. Bajwa        Headmaster          S. Mela Singh\n                              Sucha Singh\n     3.   Bibi Daljit Kaur    S. Balbir Singh     S. Harbhajan Singh\n                                                  Pardesi\n     4.   Headmaster Sucha    S. Gurcharan Singh  Prof. Joginder \n          Singh               Gatka Master        Singh\n     5.   S. Manjit Singh     S. Mangal Singh     S. Kuldip Singh\n          Greater Kailash                         Karol Bagh\n     6.   S. Mela Singh       S. Baldev Singh     S. Nirwair Singh\n  Rani Bagh         \n     7.   Dr. Harmohinder     S. Jatinder Singh   Head Master \n          Singh               Sahni               Sucha Singh\n     8.   S. Bhajan Singh     Dr. Inder Singh     S. Balbir Singh\n          Walia                                   V.V.\n     9.   S. Mangal Singh     S. Gurcharan        Dr. Harmohinder\n                              U.P. Singh          Singh\n     10.  S. Gurcharan Singh  S. Mela Singh  S. Bhajan Singh\n          Gatka Master                       Walia\n\n \n\n     After  the  meeting was over the result of  elected  members  was sealed  in  an  envelope and was sent to  the  Director  Gurdwara Elections. \n      Sd\/-\n     PARAMJIT SINGH SARNA          JATINDER SINGH SAHNI\n     GURCHARAN      SINGH GATKA MASTER\"\n \n \n\n<\/pre>\n
12.  It has been conceded during the course of arguments that there was  no secret ballot nor anyone used the ballot papers to cast his or her vote. It is contended that since there was not more than one candidate for each post it  was  not necessary to do so. Reference is made to Rule 9 of  the  Delhi Sikh  Gurdwaras (Election of Pro Tempore Chairman, President, other  Office Bearers  and Members of the Executive Board) Rules, 1974  (hereinafter  referred to as ‘the Rules’) which reads as follows :\n<\/p>\n
  “9.  If  only  one candidate is nominated he is  to  be  declared elected  If only one member is nominated as a  candidate  under the provisions of Rule 8 he shall be deemed and shall be declared to have been elected as President, Senior Vice-President,  Junior Vice-President, General Secretary or Joint Secretary, as the case may be.”\n<\/p>\n
13.  The  mode  of election of President and other office bearers  and  the respective  nominations are stated in Rules 7 and 8 of the Rules which  may also be reproduced as below :\n<\/p>\n
“7.  Election  of President, other office bearers and members  to the  Board  to take place in the order specified  –  When  office bearers  and members of the Executive Board are to be elected  at the  first meeting of the Committee or at the  subsequent  annual general meeting under the provisions of Section 16, the  election of the President shall first take place and then the election  of the Senior Vice-President. Junior Vice-President, General  Secretary and Joint Secretary and finally the election of ten  members to the Executive Board.\n<\/p>\n
     8. Nomination of office-bearers (1) When a member of the  Committee is to be elected as President, Senior Vice-President,  Junior Vice-President,  General  Secretary or Joint Secretary,  the  pro tempore  Chairman  in  the matter of election  of  President  and President in the matter of Election of other office bearers shall call  upon the members present at the meeting to nominate  candidates for the vacant office.\n<\/p>\n
     (2)  Subject  to the provisions of sub-clause (ii) of clause  (b) of section 4 any member present may propose the name of any other member of the Committee for the office of President or for  other offices  of the Executive Board and if any other  member  present seconds such a proposal the pro tempore Chairman or the President as  the  case may be, shall if the person so proposed  agrees  to such  nomination  in  case he is present in the  meeting  or  the member  proposing the name produces a certificate signed  by  the person so nominated to the effect that he agrees to such  nomination:\n<\/p>\n
     Provided that if any objection is raised under sub-section (3) of section  16 to the nomination of any candidate, the  pro  tempore Chairman  or the President, as the case may be may  make  summary enquiry and shall not enter the name of the candidate in the list if he is not satisfied that the candidate fulfills the  qualifications laid down in the said sub-section.\n<\/p>\n
     (3)  The pro tempore Chairman or the President’s decision, as the case  may  be, on the question whether the  candidate  should  or should  not be included in the list of duly nominated  candidates shall be final.”\n<\/p>\n
     It  may be relevant to reproduce below the note of the meeting of  the Observers :\n<\/p>\n
     “Sub  :  Meeting  of Delhi Sikh  Gurdwaras  Management  Committee scheduled  for 12th May, 1999 for election of President,  Office-bearers and members of the Executive Board.\n<\/p>\n
     As  directed,  we attended the meeting of  Delhi  Sikh  Gurdwaras Management  Committee  at Gurdwara Rakab Ganj Sahib today  at  11 A.M. for election of President, Office-bearers and members of the Executive  Board.  The  meeting  was started  at  11  A.M.  after “Ardas”.  49  members of DSGMC were present. The  following  Head priests of Takhats were also present :\n<\/p>\n
      1.   Jathedar Manjit Singh    :    Head Priest Sri \n                                   Keshgarh Sahib,\n                                   Anandpur.\n     2.   Jathedar Puran Singh     :    Head Priest Sri\n                                   Akal Takhat Sahib,\n                                   Amritsar.\n\n \n\n     Thereafter,  the election process was started by  the  President, DSGMC, S. Jaswant Singh Sethi. \n \n\n<\/pre>\n
     First  of  all, name of S. Paramjit Singh Sarna was  proposed  by Prof.  Joginder Singh and seconded by S. Manjit Singh. Then,  the name  of S. Jaswant Singh was proposed by S. Avtar Singh Hit  and seconded by S. Kuldip Singh Bhogal.\n<\/p>\n
     Before  the  start of polling, a controversy was raised  by  some members  regarding keeping of Ballot-box. Some  members  insisted that the ballot box will be kept in the voting compartment  (i.e. behind curtain), other members did not agree to this and asked to keep  the ballot box in front of Sri Guru Granth Sahib. On  this, there were heated arguments from both sides. It continued upto 12 Noon.  Thereafer,  the President, DSGMC S.  Jaswant  Singh  Sethi announced the adjournment of meeting and left the meeting hall.\n<\/p>\n
     Despite  efforts made by some members and the Head Priests,  further  proceedings for election could not be held. Then, at  12.50 P.M.  a letter signed by the President, DSGMC was handed over  to both of us in the meeting hall in which it was informed that  the meeting has been adjourned till further orders, fearing  violence and  disturbance  (copy of letter No. 3075\/3-1 dated  12.5.99  is also  placed in the file). On receipt of this letter, both of  us left the meeting hall.\n<\/p>\n
     Submitted for information and record please.\n<\/p>\n
      Sd\/- (INDERMOHAN SINGH)            Sd\/- (B.S. SAHNI)”\n<\/p>\n
14.  The  above will indicate that even S. Jaswant Singh Sethi was  validly proposed  and seconded and was eligible to contest for the post  of  President. Thereafter he along with other persons, as already referred to above, left  the meeting as it was stated that it was not possible to conduct  the same  in an orderly manner. The following Communication dated May 12,  1999 relates to this averment and the same reads as under :\n<\/p>\n
     “S.B.S. SAHNI <\/p>\n
     S. INDER MOHAN SINGH <\/p>\n
     OBSERVERS <\/p>\n
     GURDWARA ELECTIONS <\/p>\n
     VIKAS SADAN; NEW DELHI<\/p>\n
     Dear Sirs, <\/p>\n
     As  you  are aware that in the presence of Holy Sri  Guru  Granth Sahib,  both  the parties of the Delhi Sikh  Gurdwara  Management Committee,  have  not kept the sanctity of Holy Sri  Guru  Granth Sahib in spite of my repeated requests. The Members of DSGMC also mishandled  the  Respected Jathedar, Sri Akal Takhat Sahib  –  S. Puran Singh Ji, Some Members of DSGMC did not allow me to conduct the General Elections properly and legally.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     I,  therefore, adjourned the meeting, fearing violence  and  disurbances, till further orders.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     This is for your kind information.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
15.  Subsequently the name of S. Jaswant Singh Sethi was not considered and the  election  for the post of President as well as other  members  of  the Executive  Committee  was stated to be held by the  remaining  members  who continued  to hold the meeting. In the above background it cannot  be  said that  fair, free and valid elections were conducted in accordance with  law and in compliance with the statutory provisions. The respondents are stated to  have  hurriedly held the meeting and elected members of  the  Executive Committee  and  the President without using ballot paper or  following  the
\nprocess of law in an ordinary manner. The facts which arise for  consideration in this petition can be compared to the facts and circumstances  which came for consideration in the judgment of the Division Bench of this  Court reported  as Gurdeep Singh Dua and Others (supra). The learned Judges  even in  that  case had expressed their regret that there had  been  a  constant dispute  between the warring groups and various court cases  were  pending. There  does  not  seem to me any improvement in the attitude  of  both  the parties.  The election was not possible as more than half the  members  had
\nleft the venue and the Observers also categorically stated that the meeting stood adjourned. It is, therefore, held that the elections as  contemplated to  be held on May 12, 1999 are not in accordance with law and have  to  be set aside. It is ordered accordingly. The present arrangement shall, however, continue till the new election is held and office bearers are  declared elected.\n<\/p>\n
16.  There must, however, be found an amicable solution to the problem  and the  following directions are necessary in the facts and  circumstances  of the present case :\n<\/p>\n
     1.   Elections  of the office-bearers and Executive  Board  shall now  be held on 19th February, 2000 at 11 A.M. in the  office  of Delhi  Sikh  Gurdwara  Management Committee,  Guru  Gobind  Singh Bhawan,  Gurdwara Rakab Ganj Sahib, New Delhi 110001. Notices  of the  meeting shall be issued within one week from today  and  the Court Observer shall be informed of the same.\n<\/p>\n
     2.   Mr.  Justice  Jaspal Singh, a retired Judge  of  this  Court shall  preside over the meeting as Chairman and will be  assisted by another member which he may decide for this purpose.\n<\/p>\n
   3.   The  members  shall exercise their right to vote  by  secret ballots.\n<\/p>\n
     4.   Mr.  D.D. Singh, Advocate 343, Lawyers’ Chamber, Delhi  High Court, New Delhi is appointed as the Court Observer to be present at the time of election. Mr. D.K. Batra, Deputy Registrar of this Court  will  be  the Joint Observer and shall  assist  the  Court Observer  in discharge of his duty. The Court Observer will  prepare  a report of the elections held and the results so  declared by  the  Chairman.  No obstruction will be caused  to  the  Court Observer  and Joint Observer in the discharge of their duties  by any one. The Chairman shall be paid a sum of Rs. 25,000\/- as  his fee. The Court Observer as well as Joint Observer shall be paid a sum  of Rs. 12,000\/- and Rs. 6,000\/- as their fees  respectively. The fees shall be shared equally by the petitioners as well as by the respondents. The report of the Court Observer as approved  by the Chairman shall be submitted to this Court and shall form part of  these proceedings. A copy of the judgment shall be  given  to counsel  for  both the parties as well as to  the  Chairman,  the Court Observer and Joint Observer during the course of the day.\n<\/p>\n
17.  The Present petition is disposed of in the above terms.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court Shri Avtar Singh Hit And Ors. vs The Delhi State And Ors. on 19 January, 2000 Equivalent citations: 2000 IVAD Delhi 750, AIR 2000 Delhi 196, 84 (2000) DLT 781, 2000 (53) DRJ 746 Author: C Nayar Bench: C Nayar ORDER C.M. Nayar, J. 1. This petition has been filed under Article […]<\/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":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-153318","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nShri Avtar Singh Hit And Ors. vs The Delhi State And Ors. on 19 January, 2000 - 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\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shri Avtar Singh Hit And Ors. vs The Delhi State And Ors. on 19 January, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000\" \/>\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=\"2000-01-18T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-10-03T03:32:59+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=\"32 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shri Avtar Singh Hit And Ors. vs The Delhi State And Ors. on 19 January, 2000\",\"datePublished\":\"2000-01-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-03T03:32:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000\"},\"wordCount\":6116,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000\",\"name\":\"Shri Avtar Singh Hit And Ors. vs The Delhi State And Ors. on 19 January, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2000-01-18T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-10-03T03:32:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shri Avtar Singh Hit And Ors. vs The Delhi State And Ors. on 19 January, 2000\"}]},{\"@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":"Shri Avtar Singh Hit And Ors. vs The Delhi State And Ors. on 19 January, 2000 - 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\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shri Avtar Singh Hit And Ors. vs The Delhi State And Ors. on 19 January, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2000-01-18T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-10-03T03:32:59+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":"32 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shri Avtar Singh Hit And Ors. vs The Delhi State And Ors. on 19 January, 2000","datePublished":"2000-01-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-03T03:32:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000"},"wordCount":6116,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000","name":"Shri Avtar Singh Hit And Ors. vs The Delhi State And Ors. on 19 January, 2000 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2000-01-18T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-10-03T03:32:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shri-avtar-singh-hit-and-ors-vs-the-delhi-state-and-ors-on-19-january-2000#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shri Avtar Singh Hit And Ors. vs The Delhi State And Ors. on 19 January, 2000"}]},{"@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\/153318","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=153318"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/153318\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=153318"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=153318"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=153318"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}