{"id":167102,"date":"2008-12-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008"},"modified":"2018-07-21T09:06:24","modified_gmt":"2018-07-21T03:36:24","slug":"harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008","title":{"rendered":"Harpreet Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 1 December, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Harpreet Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 1 December, 2008<\/div>\n
CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.50108 OF 2005                                  :{ 1 }:\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH\n\n\n                    DATE OF DECISION: DECEMBER 01, 2008\n\n             Harpreet Singh and another\n\n                                                             .....Petitioners\n\n                                         VERSUS\n\n             State of Punjab\n\n                                                              ....Respondent\n\n\n\nCORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH\n\n1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement?\n2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?\n3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?\n\n\n\nPRESENT:             Mr. K. S. Sidhu, Sr.Advocate with\n                     Mr. G.S.Sidhu & Mr.Vikrant Oberoi, Advocates,\n                     for the petitioners.\n\n                    Mr. A. S. Brar, DAG, Punjab,\n                    for the State.\n\n                                  ****\n\nRANJIT SINGH, J. (ORAL)\n<\/pre>\n
             This order will dispose of two Criminal Misc. M No.50108<\/p>\n
of 2005 (Harpreet Singh and another Vs. State of Punjab) and<\/p>\n
57280 of 2005 (Kulwant Singh Gulati and others Vs. State of<\/p>\n
Punjab).\n<\/p>\n
             The petitioners have filed these petitions for quashing of<\/p>\n
FIR No.56 dated 16.7.2005 registered under Sections 406, 465, 467,<\/p>\n
468, 474 IPC. This FIR is lodged by Dharam Chand, who initially was
\n CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.50108 OF 2005                       :{ 2 }:\n<\/p>\n
not impleaded as respondent. However, on 18.7.2006, he was<\/p>\n
ordered to be served and accordingly appearance was put on his<\/p>\n
behalf on 17.11.2006. The counsel had taken time to file reply but till<\/p>\n
date, no reply has been filed. The petition was admitted on 28.3.2007<\/p>\n
and further proceedings stayed.\n<\/p>\n
           As per the allegation, the complainant had entered into an<\/p>\n
agreement with Kulwant Singh, father of petitioner No.1 and Uncle of<\/p>\n
petitioner No.2 for sale of agriculture land measuring 15 bighas 5<\/p>\n
biswas situated in village Suja, Tehsil Nabha, District Patiala. Rate<\/p>\n
agreed was Rs.26,000\/- per bigha and an amount of Rs.2,20,000\/-<\/p>\n
was paid as earnest money.          The agreement to sell was duly<\/p>\n
executed. The sale deed was to be executed on or before 15.5.1998,<\/p>\n
upon receipt of the balance amount. The true translated copy of the<\/p>\n
agreement to sell is on record as Annexure P-1\/T.<\/p>\n
           It is claimed that Dharam Chand could not execute the<\/p>\n
sale deed before the date fixed in the agreement and accordingly<\/p>\n
time was extended upto 15.9.1999. This was on receipt of another<\/p>\n
sum of Rs.60,000\/-. The extension was in the presence of witnesses<\/p>\n
like Nachhattar Singh and Niranjan Singh, who had witnessed the<\/p>\n
original agreement to sell. The true translated copy of the document,<\/p>\n
extending time of agreement is at Annexure P-2\/T. Time was again<\/p>\n
extended upto 30.11.1999 on the same terms and conditions. This<\/p>\n
was witnessed by Mahinder Singh son of Gurdev Singh and<\/p>\n
Gurcharan Singh son of Harnek Singh. The true translation of this<\/p>\n
document is also on record as Annexure P-3\/T. It is alleged that still<\/p>\n
Dharam Chand did not execute the sale deed despite grant of
\n CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.50108 OF 2005                         :{ 3 }:\n<\/p>\n
extension and instead sold 7 bighas out of this land to one<\/p>\n
Maninderjit Singh, minor son of Hakam Singh. Copy of this sale deed<\/p>\n
is placed on record as Annexure P-4. Father of petitioner No.1, with<\/p>\n
whom Dharam Chand had entered           into an agreement, thereafter<\/p>\n
filed a suit for specific performance on 18.5.2001. Copy of the plaint<\/p>\n
is annexed with the petition as Annexure P-5. The suit was contested<\/p>\n
by Dharam Chand. The evidence on behalf of the plaintiff was led in<\/p>\n
the civil suit and the plaintiff’s evidence concluded on 19.1.2004.<\/p>\n
Thereafter, the case was fixed for evidence of defendant. Instead of<\/p>\n
producing his evidence, the defendant took adjournments on one<\/p>\n
pretext or the other and in the meantime, filed a complaint for<\/p>\n
registration of a case against the petitioners and father of petitioner<\/p>\n
No.1. The complaint was entrusted to DSP for enquiry, who<\/p>\n
recommended that the complaint be filed. However, still on exerting<\/p>\n
political pressure, the impugned FIR was registered against the<\/p>\n
petitioners and father of petitioner No.1. The petitioners and father of<\/p>\n
petitioner No.1 and the witnesses who have also been roped in have<\/p>\n
filed two separate petitions, seeking quashing of this FIR.<\/p>\n
           Though initially, the quashing of the FIR was sought on<\/p>\n
various grounds that a perusal of the FIR would not reveal offences<\/p>\n
alleged etc. but during the pendency of the case, the civil suit filed by<\/p>\n
the petitioners, for specific performance stands decided. Copy of the<\/p>\n
decision given by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Nabha, was placed on<\/p>\n
record through Criminal Misc. Application No.46995 of 2008, which<\/p>\n
was allowed on 25.11.2008.\n<\/p>\n
           Mr.K.S.Sidhu, learned Senior counsel appearing for the
\n CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.50108 OF 2005                         :{ 4 }:\n<\/p>\n
petitioners, has raised a single fold submission in support of his plea.<\/p>\n
He would refer to the finding returned by the Civil Court in regard to<\/p>\n
the agreement to sell. As pointed out by the counsel, two of specific<\/p>\n
issues as were framed by the Civil Court on the basis of pleadings<\/p>\n
are as follow:-\n<\/p>\n
            “5. Whether the alleged agreement is false and<\/p>\n
            fabricated? OPD<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
            6. Whether the agreement dated 2.1.98              is forged<\/p>\n
              document and plaintiff is liable to prosecute under<\/p>\n
              criminal law? OPD”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            The counsel has then drawn my attention to the findings<\/p>\n
on these two issues. After referring to the evidence in detail led by<\/p>\n
the respective parties, the Civil Court has held as under on Issue<\/p>\n
No.5:-\n<\/p>\n
            “During the course of arguments ld. Counsel for the<\/p>\n
            defendants    had   also   pointed    out   that    the   sale<\/p>\n
            consideration is an inadequate. In these regard the cross-<\/p>\n
            examination of defendant witness DW4 can be gone into,<\/p>\n
            who himself stated that when a person requires some<\/p>\n
            money even he may sell the land at low costs. Therefore,<\/p>\n
            this objection does not hold much ground. Therefore,<\/p>\n
            from   the   above discussion, it      is   observed that<\/p>\n
            defendant No.1 has entered into an agreement to sell<\/p>\n
            dated 2.1.98 Ex.P1 which was later on extended vide<\/p>\n
            Ex.P3 and Ex.P4. Hence, all these issues are decided in<\/p>\n
            favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
 CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.50108 OF 2005                          :{ 5 }:<\/p>\n
            Similarly, issue No.6 has also been decided in favour of<\/p>\n
the petitioners and finding in this regard is as under:-<\/p>\n
            “The onus to prove this issue was upon the defendants.<\/p>\n
            As it has been observed in the above discussion, the<\/p>\n
            agreement dated 2.1.98 is not forged and fabricated<\/p>\n
            document and hence this issue is disposed of<\/p>\n
            accordingly.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            Thus, the Civil Court has found it as a matter of fact that<\/p>\n
the agreement dated 2.1.1998, Ex.P1, which is alleged to be forged,<\/p>\n
was genuinely entered into between father of petitioner No.1 and the<\/p>\n
complainant. It is also observed that time to execute this agreement<\/p>\n
to sell was extended, as seen from Exs.P3 and P4 annexed with the<\/p>\n
civil suit. Accordingly, Issue No.5 has been decided in favour of the<\/p>\n
plaintiff and against the defendant, who is complainant in the present<\/p>\n
FIR. A specific finding has also been returned by the Civil Court that<\/p>\n
the agreement dated 2.1.1998 is not a forged and fabricated<\/p>\n
document and hence, this issue has also been disposed of<\/p>\n
accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
            Taking support from this       finding   of the Civil Court,<\/p>\n
Mr.Sidhu submits that this finding of the Civil Court would be binding<\/p>\n
on the criminal court and as such, further prosecution of the<\/p>\n
petitioner with the allegation that the alleged agreement to sell was a<\/p>\n
forged, can not be permitted to continue. Learned counsel refers to a<\/p>\n
case of M\/s Karamchand Ganga Pershad and another Vs. Union<\/p>\n
of India and others, AIR 1971 Supreme Court 1244 in this regard.<\/p>\n
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in this case has held that decision of the
\n CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.50108 OF 2005                       :{ 6 }:\n<\/p>\n
civil courts are binding on criminal courts but the converse may not<\/p>\n
be true. The relevant observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in<\/p>\n
this case read as under:-\n<\/p>\n
           “……..It is a well established principle of law that the<\/p>\n
           decisions of the civil courts are binding on the criminal<\/p>\n
           courts. The converse is not true. The High Court after<\/p>\n
           entertaining the writ petitions and hearing arguments on<\/p>\n
           the merits of the case should not have dismissed the<\/p>\n
           petitions   merely     because     certain   consequential<\/p>\n
           proceedings had been taken on the basis that the exports<\/p>\n
           in question were illegal. For the decision of the<\/p>\n
           controversy between the parties to the writ petitions<\/p>\n
           neither the presence of the State of West Bengal nor the<\/p>\n
           authorities who took penal action was necessary. The<\/p>\n
           validity of the steps taken by them, as mentioned earlier<\/p>\n
           would depend upon the validity or otherwise of the export<\/p>\n
           in question.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           Reference is also made to the decision of this Court in<\/p>\n
Mohinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2004 (4) RCR<\/p>\n
(Criminal) 428. In this case, FIR was lodged under various Sections<\/p>\n
of the IPC on the ground that Government servant has altered the<\/p>\n
date of birth from 30.9.1929 to 1.10.1930 in the official record. Civil<\/p>\n
Court gave a finding that date of birth was 1.10.1930 and criminal<\/p>\n
proceedings pending against the delinquent were quashed, holding<\/p>\n
that in view of the finding of the Civil Court, continuation of FIR is<\/p>\n
nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court.       This Court in
\n CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.50108 OF 2005                        :{ 7 }:\n<\/p>\n
Krishan Jeet Singh       Vs.    State of Haryana, 2003 (1) RCR<\/p>\n
(Criminal) 183 has also taken somewhat identical view by observing<\/p>\n
that when criminal and civil proceedings are pending and in a divorce<\/p>\n
petition under the Hindu Marriage Act, allegations of cruelty are not<\/p>\n
proved, this judgment of the Civil Court would be binding on the<\/p>\n
criminal Court and charge of cruelty in criminal proceedings was<\/p>\n
dropped.\n<\/p>\n
           It is, thus, clear that the main allegations for which the<\/p>\n
petitioners are being prosecuted related to the agreement dated<\/p>\n
2.1.1998 to be forged one. The finding given by the Civil Court that<\/p>\n
this agreement is genuine and is not a fabricated or forged<\/p>\n
document, will bind any finding, which the criminal court may<\/p>\n
ultimately reach. This is, as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble<\/p>\n
Supreme Court and this Court as noticed above. Once this finding<\/p>\n
has come in favour of the petitioners, which is not impugned by the<\/p>\n
complainant but is in appeal by the petitioners on different point,<\/p>\n
these findings on Issue Nos.5 and 6 have acquired finality.<\/p>\n
           In view of the ratio of law laid down in the judgments<\/p>\n
noticed above, the present criminal proceedings against the<\/p>\n
petitioners, thus, can not be permitted to continue. The FIR and all<\/p>\n
subsequent proceedings are therefore quashed.<\/p>\n
           Both the petitions are accordingly allowed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
December 01,2008                        ( RANJIT SINGH )\nkhurmi                                        JUDGE\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Harpreet Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 1 December, 2008 CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.50108 OF 2005 :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: DECEMBER 01, 2008 Harpreet Singh and another …..Petitioners VERSUS State of Punjab ….Respondent CORAM:- HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH […]<\/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-167102","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nHarpreet Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 1 December, 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\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Harpreet Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 1 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-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=\"2008-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-07-21T03:36:24+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Harpreet Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 1 December, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-21T03:36:24+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1613,\"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\\\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008\",\"name\":\"Harpreet Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 1 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-21T03:36:24+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Harpreet Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 1 December, 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:\\\/\\\/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":"Harpreet Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 1 December, 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\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Harpreet Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 1 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-07-21T03:36:24+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Harpreet Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 1 December, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-21T03:36:24+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008"},"wordCount":1613,"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\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008","name":"Harpreet Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 1 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-21T03:36:24+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/harpreet-singh-and-another-vs-state-of-punjab-on-1-december-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Harpreet Singh And Another vs State Of Punjab on 1 December, 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:\/\/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\/167102","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=167102"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/167102\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=167102"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=167102"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=167102"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}