{"id":155118,"date":"2008-08-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-08-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008"},"modified":"2016-01-25T14:35:20","modified_gmt":"2016-01-25T09:05:20","slug":"ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008","title":{"rendered":"Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 August, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 August, 2008<\/div>\n
CWP No.4935 of 1982                                             1\n\n      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT\n                    CHANDIGARH.\n\n                                      CWP No.4935 of 1982\n                                      Date of Decision: 7.8.2008\n\nRanjit Singh and others                           ....Petitioners\n\n                               Vs.\n\nState of Punjab and others                        ....Respondents\n                               ....\n<\/pre>\n
CORAM :     HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA\n\n                               ****\n\n<\/pre>\n
Present :   Mr. Gurcharan Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.\n<\/p>\n
            Mr.N.S. Pawar, Addl.A.G. Punjab for the respondents.<\/p>\n
                               …\n<\/p>\n
RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral)<\/p>\n
            The petitioners pray for the issuance of a writ in the nature of<\/p>\n
Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing the<\/p>\n
orders dated 16.6.1976, 12.12.1978 and 7.10.1982.<\/p>\n
            The surplus area case of Kaka Singh, a big land owner, was<\/p>\n
decided by the Collector, Agrarian, Barnala on 16.6.1976, declaring land<\/p>\n
measuring 1.58.57 hectare of `A’ quality land as surplus. Kaka Singh,<\/p>\n
thereafter, filed an appeal, before the Commissioner, Patiala Division,<\/p>\n
Patiala, under Section 18 of the Punjab Land Reforms Act, 1972<\/p>\n
(hereinafter referred to as `the Act’).     The appeal was dismissed on<\/p>\n
12.12.1978. Kaka Singh, thereafter, filed a revision before the Financial<\/p>\n
Commissioner, Punjab, Chandigarh. The revision petition was dismissed on<\/p>\n
7.10.1982. During the pendency of the revision, the petitioners filed an<\/p>\n
application accompanied by an affidavit that Kaka Singh was passed away<\/p>\n
on 23.4.1982 and the petitioners, who are his widow, sons and daughters,
\n CWP No.4935 of 1982                                            2<\/span><\/p>\n
should be impleaded as parties. It was also prayed that as the big land<\/p>\n
owner had passed away, the surplus area would have to be redetermined in<\/p>\n
the hands of his legal representatives. The learned Financial Commissioner<\/p>\n
dismissed the revision petition,by holding that surplus area could not be<\/p>\n
redetermined in the hands of legal representatives, as it had to be<\/p>\n
determined on 3.10.1973 when Kaka Singh filed Form `A’. It was also held<\/p>\n
that the application for impleading of legal representatives was false, as the<\/p>\n
Death Certificate produced referred to the date of Death as 5.9.1982,<\/p>\n
whereas in the application, the date of death was 23.4.1982.<\/p>\n
            Counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned Financial<\/p>\n
Commissioner, committed an error on two counts, firstly; by holding that<\/p>\n
the surplus area could not be redetermined at the hands of the legal heirs<\/p>\n
and secondly that the application for impleading of legal representatives of<\/p>\n
Kaka Singh was false. It is submitted that the petitioners had appended<\/p>\n
copy of a death certificate, issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths,<\/p>\n
which clearly discloses that Kaka Singh passed away on 5.9.1982. The<\/p>\n
date of death, 23.4.1982 was inadvertently typed in the application. This<\/p>\n
inadvertent error on the part of their counsel should have been ignored. It<\/p>\n
is further argued that the controversy in the present case is squarely covered<\/p>\n
by a judgement of a Full Bench in Sardara Singh                V. Financial<\/p>\n
Commissioner,<\/a> 2008(2) Law Herald (Punjab and Haryana), 961, as it has<\/p>\n
been held that in case a big land owner passes away, during the pendency of<\/p>\n
an appeal, revision or a writ petition and the State has failed to       take<\/p>\n
possession of surplus area so determined, the legal heirs of such a big land<\/p>\n
owner would be entitled to a redetermination of the land belongs to the big<\/p>\n
land owner, received by them upon inheritance.\n<\/p>\n
 CWP No.4935 of 1982                                           3<\/span><\/p>\n
            Counsel for the State of Punjab, accepts that the controversy in<\/p>\n
the instant case is squarely covered by the judgement of the Full Bench<\/p>\n
referred to herein above.\n<\/p>\n
            The learned Financial Commissioner declined the prayer for<\/p>\n
redetermination of the surplus area in the hands of legal heirs of Kaka<\/p>\n
Singh, by holding that their application for being impleaded as legal heirs<\/p>\n
was false. The learned Financial Commissioner, did not peruse or refer to a<\/p>\n
copy of the Death Certificate, issued by the Registrar of Births and Deaths,<\/p>\n
appended with the application.          The death certificate clearly and<\/p>\n
categorically refers to     the date of death   of Kaka Singh as 5.9.1982.<\/p>\n
Reference to the date of death as 23.4.1982 in the application was an<\/p>\n
inadvertent error on the part of the petitioners counsel and, should,<\/p>\n
therefore,have been ignored.\n<\/p>\n
            Admittedly, Kaka Singh, the big land owner, passed away on<\/p>\n
5.9.1982. A mutation of inheritance, to the estate of Kaka Singh was<\/p>\n
sanctioned in favour of petitioners no.1 to 4. The petitioners’ contention<\/p>\n
that on account of the demise of Kaka Singh, during the pendency of<\/p>\n
proceedings for determination of surplus area, the respondents would be<\/p>\n
required to redetermine the surplus area in the hands of Kaka Singh’s legal<\/p>\n
heirs in view of the Full Bench judgement in Sardara Singh (supra). A<\/p>\n
relevant extract of the aforementioned judgement reads as follows :-<\/p>\n
                   “40. We are of the view that the controversy can be<\/p>\n
                   resolved either through reading the plain meaning of<\/p>\n
                   words or through harmonious construction, if the plain<\/p>\n
                   meaning of words does not yield any result.          The<\/p>\n
                   majority view had taken the plain meaning of the words
\n CWP No.4935 of 1982                                        4<\/span><\/p>\n
               and come to the definite conclusion which has been<\/p>\n
               reproduced above. Nevertheless, the minority view is<\/p>\n
               also based on the plain meaning of certain words<\/p>\n
               occurring in Section 11(7). The difference between the<\/p>\n
               two views is with regard to the meaning of “determine”<\/p>\n
               and “determined. The majority view appears to be to take<\/p>\n
               “determine” and “determined” to mean the same thing<\/p>\n
               but the minority view is that “determine” means to decide<\/p>\n
               while “determined” used in Section 11(7) means to put<\/p>\n
               to or come to an end.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
               41.    We may take the assistance of the judgement of the<\/p>\n
               Supreme Court in Ajmer Kaur’s case (supra) where the<\/p>\n
               phrase “determine by the Collector” used in Section 11<\/p>\n
               (7) was read to mean that the order of the Collector had<\/p>\n
               attained finality. In that case the order of the Collector<\/p>\n
               had been passed in 1976 when the land was declared<\/p>\n
               surplus.     The   appeal   was    dismissed    in   1979.<\/p>\n
               Subsequently, the surplus land had been mutated in<\/p>\n
               favour of the State Government in 1982 and allotted to<\/p>\n
               private individuals in 1983. The landowner had filed an<\/p>\n
               application in 1985 for redetermination in view of the<\/p>\n
               death of his wife but the Supreme Court held that<\/p>\n
               determination by the Collector in 1979 had become final<\/p>\n
               and could not be reopened in 1985.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
               42.    The arguments of the learned counsel for Rattan<\/p>\n
               Devi may not be required to be examined in detail
\n CWP No.4935 of 1982                                           5<\/span><\/p>\n
               because we are harmoniously constructing Sections 11(5)<\/p>\n
               and 11(7) of the Act.        This necessarily implies that<\/p>\n
               Section 11(7) is not be declared otiose or unworkable, as<\/p>\n
               the learned counsel had tried to advance before us.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
               43.      We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that in<\/p>\n
               order to harmoniously read the two views in Ajit Kaur’s<\/p>\n
               case and to give correct interpretation of the provision of<\/p>\n
               Section11(5) and 11(7) of this Act, we ought to take the<\/p>\n
               aid of Supreme Court’s judgement in Ajmer Kaur’s case.<\/p>\n
               We hold that until the surplus area has been finally<\/p>\n
               determined by the Collector and appeals\/revisions have<\/p>\n
               been dismissed, the death of the landowner would<\/p>\n
               certainly cause affectation to the surplus area which<\/p>\n
               would be required to be redetermined in the hands of his<\/p>\n
               heirs.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
               44.      Resultantly, where the surplus area has not been<\/p>\n
               finally determined and the matter is pending in appeals or<\/p>\n
               revisions before the Revenue Courts or before this Court<\/p>\n
               under Article 226 of the Constitution, or before the<\/p>\n
               Supreme Court of India, death of the landowner would<\/p>\n
               cause affectation of surplus area which would be<\/p>\n
               required to be redetermined in the hands of the heirs of<\/p>\n
               the deceased landowner. Such an interpretation would<\/p>\n
               harmoniously construct the provisions of Section 11(5)<\/p>\n
               and 11(7) and also give a proper interpretation to both<\/p>\n
               the views expressed in Ajit Kaur’s case. However, we are
\n CWP No.4935 of 1982                                            6<\/span><\/p>\n
                  unable to uphold the judgements of this Court in Jasbir<\/p>\n
                  Kaur’s case because Ajit Kaur’s case was not at all<\/p>\n
                  considered by the Hon’ble Division Bench. As regards<\/p>\n
                  Manjit Kaur’s case, even though Ajit Kaur’s case was<\/p>\n
                  considered, the majority view had been entirely over<\/p>\n
                  looked.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            In view of the binding opinion of the Hon’ble Full Bench, the<\/p>\n
writ petitions are allowed, the orders dated 16.6.1976, 12.12.1978 and<\/p>\n
7.10.1982 are set aside and the matter is remitted to the Collector, Barnala,<\/p>\n
for adjudication of the surplus area case of Kaka Singh, afresh, in the hands<\/p>\n
of the legal heirs of Kaka Singh, namely the petitioners. No order as to<\/p>\n
costs.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
7.8.2008                                          (RAJIVE BHALLA)\nGS                                                     JUDGE\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 August, 2008 CWP No.4935 of 1982 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CWP No.4935 of 1982 Date of Decision: 7.8.2008 Ranjit Singh and others ….Petitioners Vs. State of Punjab and others ….Respondents …. CORAM : […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-155118","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nRanjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 August, 2008 - 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\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-25T09:05:20+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 August, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-25T09:05:20+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1339,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008\",\"name\":\"Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-25T09:05:20+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 August, 2008\"}]},{\"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"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":"Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 August, 2008 - 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\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-25T09:05:20+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 August, 2008","datePublished":"2008-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-25T09:05:20+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008"},"wordCount":1339,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008","name":"Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 August, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-25T09:05:20+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ranjit-singh-and-others-vs-state-of-punjab-and-others-on-7-august-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 August, 2008"}]},{"@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:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","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\/155118","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=155118"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/155118\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=155118"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=155118"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=155118"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}