{"id":159415,"date":"1995-02-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1995-02-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995"},"modified":"2018-05-29T23:49:48","modified_gmt":"2018-05-29T18:19:48","slug":"habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995","title":{"rendered":"Habibulla Khan vs State Of Orissa & Anr on 2 February, 1995"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Habibulla Khan vs State Of Orissa & Anr on 2 February, 1995<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1995 AIR 1123, \t\t 1995 SCC (2) 437<\/div>\n
Author: P Sawant<\/div>\n
Bench: Sawant, P.B.<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nHABIBULLA KHAN\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF ORISSA & ANR.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT02\/02\/1995\n\nBENCH:\nSAWANT, P.B.\nBENCH:\nSAWANT, P.B.\nRAY, G.N. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1995 AIR 1123\t\t  1995 SCC  (2) 437\n JT 1995 (2)\t 1\t  1995 SCALE  (1)419\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
1.   Leave granted.\n<\/p>\n
2.   A\tcommon\tquestion of law, viz., whether\tsanction  is
\nrequired  for launching a criminal prosecution\tagainst\t the
\nappellants, has been raised in these appeals.\n<\/p>\n
3.The  Orissa Special Courts Act,1990 [hereinafter  referred
\nto as the “Special  Courts  Act”] which came into  force  on
\n27th July, 1992 after receiving the assent of the President,
\nprovides  for constitution of special courts for the  speedy
\ntrial\tof   certain  classes  of  offences  and   for\t the
\nconfiscation  of  the property involved\t in  such  offences.
\nSection\t 2  [d]\t of that Act defines “offence”\tto  mean  an
\noffence of criminal misconduct within the meaning of  clause\n<\/p>\n
(e)  of sub-section [1] of Section 13 of the  Prevention  of
\nCorruption Act, 1988 [hereinafter referred to as the “Act”].
\nSection\t 5 [1] of the Special Courts Act, as amended by\t the
\nAmendment of 1993 reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n
\t      “5  [1].\t If the State Government is  of\t the
\n\t      opinion that there is prima facie evidence  of
\n\t      the  commission of an offence alleged to\thave
\n\t      been combined by a person who held high public
\n\t      or  political office in the State\t of  Orissa,
\n\t      the State Government shall make a\t declaration
\n\t      to that effect in every case in which it is of
\n\t      the aforesaid opinion”.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
4.   Rule  2 (1) [f] (i) of the Orissa Special Courts  Rules
\n[hereinafter referred to as the “Rules”] reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n
\t      “2  (1} [f].  “Person holding  high  political
\n\t      office” includes-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (i)   members of the Council of Ministers\t and
\n\t      the Chief Minister”.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
5.Clause [e] of sub-section [1] of Section   13\t of the\t Act
\ndefines “offence of criminal misconduct” as follows:\n<\/p>\n
\t      “13.  Criminal misconduct by a public servant.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      – [1] A public servant is said to
\n\t      commit the offence of criminal misconduct –\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      x\t    x\t     x\t      x\t       x x\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (e)   if\the or any person on his behalf,\t is.
\n\t      in    possession\tor has, at any\ttime  during
\n\t      the  period of his office, been in  possession
\n\t      for   which   the\t  public   servant    cannot
\n\t      satisfactorily account, of pecuniary resources
\n\t      or  property  disproportionate  to  his  known
\n\t      sources of income.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      Explanation.  –  For  the\t purposes  of\tthis
\n\t      section,\t“known\tsources\t of  income”   means
\n\t      income  received\tfrom any lawful\t source\t and
\n\t      such receipt has been intimated in  accordance
\n\t      with  the\t provisions  of any  law,  rules  or
\n\t      orders  for  the time being  applicable  to  a
\n\t      public servant.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
6.   It\t is  not  disputed  that  all  the  appellants\twere
\nMinisters  in  the Council of Ministers of  the\t respondent-
\nState of Orissa during the period in which they were alleged
\nto  have been found in possession of pecuniary resources  or
\nproperty disproportionate to their known sources of  income.
\nSubsequently, they ceased to be Ministers due to the  change
\nof Government and thereafter were elected as the Members  of
\nthe  Legislative  Assembly of the State [“MLA”\tfor  short].
\nThey continued to be such Members till the prosecutions were
\nlaunched against them for the said criminal misconduct under
\nSection 13 [1] (e) of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
7.   Shri  Habibulla  Khan,  the  appellant  in\t the  appeal
\narising\t out  of SLP No. 1563 of 1993 filed  an\t application
\nbefore\tthe Special Court on 25th July, 1991  for  recalling
\nthe  orders of the cognisance of the offence on\t the  ground
\nthat at the time of taking the cognisance, he was an MLA and
\nas such a public servant within the meaning of Section 2 [c]\n<\/p>\n
(viii) of the Act and, therefore, he could not be tried\t for
\nthe offence under Section 13 [1] (e) of the Act without\t the
\nsanction  of the Governor of the State under Section  19  of
\nthe Act who according to him was competent to remove an\t MLA
\nunder  Article\t192 of the Constitution.  On  18th  January,
\n1991,  the Special Court dismissed the\tapplication  holding
\nthat  an  MLA  was  not a public  servant  and\tfurther\t the
\nGovernor  was  not competent to remove an MLA and  hence  no
\nsanction was required under the said provision.\t This  order
\nwas  assailed by the appellant before the High\tCourt  under
\nSection\t 482  of  the Code of  Criminal\t Procedure  on\t22nd
\nJanuary,  1993.\t The learned Single Judge of the High  Court
\nreferred  the matter to Division Bench which  dismissed\t the
\nmatter\tby  its impugned judgment of 5th May,  1993  holding
\nthat  an  MLA  is a public servant  within  the\t meaning  of
\nSection 2 [c] (viii) of the Act; but the power of  “removal”
\nmentioned in Section 19 of the Act partakes the character of
\npunishment and the Governor has no power of removal of an WA
\nunder Article 192 of the Constitution by way of\t punishment.
\nThere was a distinction between the concept of “removal”  as
\nused in Section 19 of the Act and that of “disqualification”
\nas  used  in  Article 192 of the  Constitution.\t  Since\t the
\nGovernor  was  not  the\t authority to  remove  an  &MA,\t the
\nsanction was not necessary under Section 19  of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
8.   The appellant, Nagarjuna Pradhan in appeal arising\t out
\nof  SLP No.2261 of 1994 raised similar plea on 17th  August,
\n1993  but  a long time after the  prosecution  was  launched
\nagainst him and 31 prosecution witnesses were examined.\n<\/p>\n
9.   Similarly, the appellant, Rama
\n3<\/span>
\nChandra\t Ulaka in appeals arising out of to SLP\t Nos.2259-60
\nof   1994  raised  the\tsame  plea  belatedly  in  the\t two
\nprosecutions  launched\tagainst him after 16  and  18  pros-
\necution witnesses respectively were examined in those cases.\n<\/p>\n
10.  The  appellants are being prosecuted for  the  criminal
\nmisconduct  which they are alleged to have committed  during
\nthe  period they were holding high political  office  within
\nthe meaning of Section 5 [1] of the Special Courts Act\tread
\nwith  Rule 2 (1) [f] (1) of the Rules made under  that\tAct.
\nThe  Special  Courts  Act  incorporates\t the  definition  of
\n“criminal  misconduct”\tgiven in section 13 [1] (e)  of\t the
\nAct.  The procedure for prosecution to be followed, however,
\nis as laid down under the Special Courts Act.  All that\t the
\nSpecial\t Courts Act requires for launching a criminal  pros-
\necution\t against a person holding high political  office  is
\nthat  the State Government should make a  declaration  under
\nSection 5 [1] of that Act that there is prima facie evidence
\nof  the commission of an offence by a person who  held\thigh
\npublic\tor political office in the State.  Hence the  provi-
\nsions of Section 19 of the Act do not come into the  picture
\nin  the\t present case.\tThat being so, no  sanction  of\t the
\nGovernor  or any other authority is necessary for  launching
\nthe criminal prosecutions in question.\n<\/p>\n
11.  Assuming,\thowever, that the procedure to\tbe  followed
\nbefore launching criminal prosecution is that under the Act,
\nthe  admitted  facts  are  that\t the  appellants  are  being
\nprosecuted for the misconduct alleged to have been committed
\nby them during their tenure as the Members of the Council of
\nMinisters and not in their capacity as the MLAs.  Hence\t the
\nprovisions of Section 19 of the Act are inapplicable to\t the
\nfacts  of  the present case as held in R.S.  Nayak  v.\tA.R.
\nAntulay<\/a> [(1984) 2 SCR 495].\n<\/p>\n
12.  The second question is whether the appellants could  be
\nprosecuted  for the offence which they are alleged  to\thave
\ncommitted during their tenure as ministers after they ceased
\nto  be the ministers.  This question has also been  answered
\nby two decisions of this Court.\t In S.A. Venkataraman v. The
\nState [(1958) SCR 1040], it is held while construing similar
\nprovision of Section 6 of the predecessor of the present Act
\nwhich provision was similar to the provisions of Section  19
\nof  the present Act that no sanction was necessary  for\t the
\nprosecution  of the appellant in that case, as he was not  a
\npublic\tservant at the time of the taking of  cognizance  of
\nthe offence.  The Court there observed as follows:\n<\/p>\n
\t      “In construing the provisions of a statute  it
\n\t      is  essential  for a Court, in the  first\t in-
\n\t      stance, to give effect to the natural  meaning
\n\t      of the words used therein, if those words\t are
\n\t      clear  enough.  It is only in the case of\t any
\n\t      ambiguity\t  that\ta  Court  is   entitled\t  to
\n\t      ascertain\t the intention of  the\tlegislature.
\n\t      Where a general power to take cognizance of an
\n\t      offence is vested in a Court, any\t prohibition
\n\t      to   the\texercise  of  that  power,  by\t any
\n\t      provision\t of  law, must be  confined  to\t the
\n\t      terms  of the prohibition.  The words  in\t S.6
\n\t      (1)  of the Act are clear enough and  must  be
\n\t      given effect to.\tThe more important words ‘in
\n\t      cl.  (c)\tof s. 6 (1) are\t “of  the  authority
\n\t      competent\t to remove him from his office”.   A
\n\t      public  servant who has ceased to be a  public
\n\t      servant  is  not a person removable  from\t any
\n\t      office by competent authority.  The conclusion
\n\t      is  inevitable  that at the time\ta  Court  is
\n\t      asked  to\t take cognizance not only  must\t the
\n\t      offence have
\n\t      been  committed  by a public servant  but\t the
\n\t      person accused must still be a public  servant
\n\t      removable\t from  his  office  by\ta  competent
\n\t      authority\t before\t the provisions of  s.6\t can
\n\t      apply.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
13.Similarly, a Constitution Bench in Veeraswami v. Union of
\nIndia  and others<\/a> [(1991) 3 SCC 655], while  construing\t the
\nprovisions  of\tthe  same Section 6  of\t the  Prevention  of
\nCorruption  Act, 1947 held that no sanction under Section  6
\nof  that Act was necessary for prosecution of the  appellant
\nin that case since he had retired from service on  attaining
\nthe  age of superannuation and was not a public\t servant  on
\nthe date of filing the charge sheet.\n<\/p>\n
14.However,  it\t was contended that while the  Governor\t had
\ngiven sanction to prosecute the Chief Minister when he\tcon-
\ntinued to be an MLA in the case of R.S. Nayak v. A.R.Antulay<\/a>
\n[supra], the question whether the sanction was necessary  to
\nprosecute  an  MLA as a public servant did not\tarise.\t It,
\nwas, therefore, contended that although the offence  alleged
\nto have been committed was during the appellants’ tenure  as
\nministers,   the  appellants  continued\t to  be\t MLAs\tand,
\ntherefore, as public servants on the day of the launching of
\nprosecution and hence sanction of the Governor under Article
\n192  of the Constitution was necessary.\t This  question\t has
\nalso  been answered in R.S. Nayak v. A.R.  Antulay<\/a>  [supra].
\nReferring  to this Court’s decision in The State of  (S.P.E.
\nHyderabad)  v.\tAir Commodore Kailash Chand<\/a>  [(1980)  2\t SCR
\n697], this Court held as follows:\n<\/p>\n
\t      “………  We would however, like to make  it
\n\t      abundantly  clear\t that if the  two  decisions
\n\t      purport  -to  lay down that even if  a  public
\n\t      servant  has  ceased to hold  that  office  as
\n\t      public  servant  which he is alleged  to\thave
\n\t      abused or misused for corrupt motives, but  on
\n\t      the  date of taking cognizance of\t an  offence
\n\t      alleged  to  have been committed by him  as  a
\n\t      public servant which he ceased to be and holds
\n\t      an  entirely different public office which  he
\n\t      is  neither alleged to have misused or  abused
\n\t      for  corrupt  motives,  yet  the\tsanction  of
\n\t      authority\t competent to remove him  from\tsuch
\n\t\t\t    latter office would be necessary before taking
\n\t      cogaizance of the offence alleged to have been
\n\t      committed by the public servant while  holding
\n\t      an  office which he is alleged to have  abused
\n\t      or  misused and which he has ceased  to  hold,
\n\t      the decisions in our opinion, do not lay\tdown
\n\t      the  correct  law and cannot  be\taccepted  as
\n\t      making a correct interpretation of Sec.6
\n\t      Therefore, upon a true construction of Sec. 6,
\n\t      it  is implicit therein that sanction of\tthat
\n\t      competent\t authority alone would be  necessary
\n\t      which  is\t competent  to\tremove\tthe   public
\n\t      servant from the office which he is alleged to
\n\t      have misused or abused for corrupt motive\t and
\n\t      for  which  a prosecution is  intended  to  be
\n\t      launched against him.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
15.  Assuming  therefore, that the MLA is a  public  servant
\nwithin\tthe meaning of Section 2 (c) (viii) of the  Act,  in
\nview  of the aforesaid proposition of law laid down in\tR.S.
\nNayak v. A.R. Antulay<\/a> [supra], this contention also does not
\nmerit any consideration.\n<\/p>\n
16.In view of the above, the appeals are dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
8<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Habibulla Khan vs State Of Orissa & Anr on 2 February, 1995 Equivalent citations: 1995 AIR 1123, 1995 SCC (2) 437 Author: P Sawant Bench: Sawant, P.B. PETITIONER: HABIBULLA KHAN Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF ORISSA & ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT02\/02\/1995 BENCH: SAWANT, P.B. BENCH: SAWANT, P.B. RAY, G.N. (J) CITATION: 1995 […]<\/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-159415","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nHabibulla Khan vs State Of Orissa & Anr on 2 February, 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\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Habibulla Khan vs State Of Orissa & Anr on 2 February, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-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=\"1995-02-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-29T18:19:48+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Habibulla Khan vs State Of Orissa & Anr on 2 February, 1995\",\"datePublished\":\"1995-02-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-29T18:19:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995\"},\"wordCount\":1947,\"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\\\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995\",\"name\":\"Habibulla Khan vs State Of Orissa & Anr on 2 February, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1995-02-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-29T18:19:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Habibulla Khan vs State Of Orissa & Anr on 2 February, 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":"Habibulla Khan vs State Of Orissa & Anr on 2 February, 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\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Habibulla Khan vs State Of Orissa & Anr on 2 February, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1995-02-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-29T18:19:48+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Habibulla Khan vs State Of Orissa & Anr on 2 February, 1995","datePublished":"1995-02-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-29T18:19:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995"},"wordCount":1947,"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\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995","name":"Habibulla Khan vs State Of Orissa & Anr on 2 February, 1995 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1995-02-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-29T18:19:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/habibulla-khan-vs-state-of-orissa-anr-on-2-february-1995#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Habibulla Khan vs State Of Orissa & Anr on 2 February, 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\/159415","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=159415"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/159415\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=159415"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=159415"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=159415"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}