{"id":173215,"date":"2009-08-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-08-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009"},"modified":"2015-10-15T22:18:04","modified_gmt":"2015-10-15T16:48:04","slug":"tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009","title":{"rendered":"Tushar Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 21 August, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Tushar Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 21 August, 2009<\/div>\n
CRM-M No.32091 of 2008 (O&M)                -1-\n\n\nIN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH\n\n\n                                     CRM-M No.32091 of 2008 (O&M)\n\n                                     Date of Decision: 21.8.2009\n\n\nTushar Kumar\n                                                  ..Petitioner.\n\nVs.\n\nState of Haryana and another\n                                                  ..Respondents.\n\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN\n\n\nPresent :   Mr.R.S.Cheema, Sr.Advocate with\n            Ms.Tanu Bedi, Advocate for the petitioner.\n\n            Mr.Narender Sura, AAG Haryana for the State\/respondent.\n\n            Mr.Harbhagwan Singh, Sr.Advocate with\n            Mr.Amit K.Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2.\n\n\nRAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J.\n<\/pre>\n
            This is a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of<\/p>\n
anticipatory bail in case registered vide FIR No.141 dated 6.10.2008 under<\/p>\n
Sections 406\/420\/506\/120-B IPC at Police Station DLF Phase-I, Gurgaon.<\/p>\n
            The aforesaid FIR has been registered on the complaint of<\/p>\n
H.S.Lamba, Managing Director of M\/s Sneh Developers Pvt. Ltd. Briefly,<\/p>\n
the allegations contained in the FIR are that the petitioner, who is managing<\/p>\n
Director of GTM Builders and Promoters Pvt. Ltd., approached the<\/p>\n
complainant for the construction of multi-storeyed building on an area of<\/p>\n
about 1 acre purchased by him at village Gowal Pahari, Gurgaon. The<\/p>\n
building was to be known as Tower No.11. The petitioner had assured the
\n CRM-M No.32091 of 2008 (O&M)                 -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
complainant company that his company is a cash rich company and will pay<\/p>\n
the running bills of the construction well within time. On this assurance, the<\/p>\n
complainant company entered into an agreement with the petitioner on<\/p>\n
10.3.2005 and started construction of the building. It was agreed upon<\/p>\n
between the parties that the petitioner shall supply cement and steel which<\/p>\n
shall be adjusted in the cost of the bills. After a few months of the inception<\/p>\n
of the construction, the petitioner delayed the payment of running bills on<\/p>\n
the ground that funds received in the proposed building have been blocked<\/p>\n
in another land purchased by him. He requested the complainant to carry on<\/p>\n
the construction work and on his request and assurance, funds were<\/p>\n
arranged from the market on a high rate of interest and invested the same in<\/p>\n
purchasing the machinaries and building construction material. Since there<\/p>\n
was a dispute between the parties with regard to construction and delayed<\/p>\n
payment of money, an addendum agreement was executed on 28.9.2006 as<\/p>\n
per which the company owned by the petitioner, assured the complainant<\/p>\n
that they would make the payment within 10 days on the submission of the<\/p>\n
bills. But despite that the bills were not paid in time, however, a fresh<\/p>\n
memorandum of understanding was executed on 25.3.2008 as per which the<\/p>\n
petitioner had agreed to pay Rs.1.25 Crores for the escalation charges in the<\/p>\n
construction material for structure raised as on 25.3.2008 and also agreed to<\/p>\n
pay the running bills in time with penalty for delay and the entire building<\/p>\n
work was scheduled to be completed by December 2008. It is also alleged<\/p>\n
that as soon as the complainant Company completed the structure of 96 flats<\/p>\n
of 17 floor of the multi-storeyed tower and were completing the finishing<\/p>\n
work of the flats at great speed, the petitioner showed his true colours and<\/p>\n
stopped making payment of running bills. Last bill dated 17.7.2008 of
\n CRM-M No.32091 of 2008 (O&M)                 -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
Rs.42.62 lacs was not paid but only Rs.5 lacs was paid for making payment<\/p>\n
of wages to the labour. The total outstanding as on 31.8.2008 against GTM<\/p>\n
Company is 2.88 Crores. It is also alleged that the petitioner had threatened<\/p>\n
the complainant and had also bribed his employees.\n<\/p>\n
            Before coming to this Court, the petitioner had applied for<\/p>\n
anticipatory bail before the Court below which was dismissed by the<\/p>\n
Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Gurgaon on 11.10.2008.<\/p>\n
            Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that<\/p>\n
the dispute between the parties is essentially of a civil nature which is borne<\/p>\n
out from the documents itself, therefore, custodial interrogation is not<\/p>\n
required. It is submitted that on 10.3.2005 agreement (Annexure P-2) was<\/p>\n
entered into between the parties as per which the petitioner had given the<\/p>\n
job of construction to the complainant on turn-key basis. The date of<\/p>\n
commencement of work agreed between the parties was 10.3.2005 and the<\/p>\n
date of completion was 31.10.2006. Since the work of contract should have<\/p>\n
been completed before the stipulated date and was not completed, therefore,<\/p>\n
vide (Annexure P-3) registered notice was given on 31.7.2006 calling upon<\/p>\n
the complainant to remedy the breach within a period of 15 days failing<\/p>\n
which the agreement Annexure P-2 shall stand terminated and the balance<\/p>\n
work shall be completed through other agency at the risk and cost of the<\/p>\n
complainant. Thereafter, addendum to the agreement dated 10.3.2005<\/p>\n
(Annexure P-2) was executed on 28.9.2006 (Annexure P-4) in which it was<\/p>\n
agreed by the complainant that they would furnish bank guarantee in favour<\/p>\n
of the petitioner for a sum of Rs.50 lacs at the time of signing its<\/p>\n
performance of the contract and shall issue five cheques of Rs.10 lacs each<\/p>\n
without mentioning the date, in favour of the petitioner. It was also provided
\n CRM-M No.32091 of 2008 (O&M)                -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
in the addendum that the petitioner shall have right of lien on all<\/p>\n
machinaries and equipments deployed or to be deployed at site under the<\/p>\n
completion of GTM Residency Tower in all respects. If the complainant<\/p>\n
commits any default in performance of the contract then the petitioner shall<\/p>\n
have the right of lawful possession of the said machinery and equipment<\/p>\n
and shall also have a right to dispose them off for the purpose of realisation<\/p>\n
of damages. It is further submitted that despite the addendum, the<\/p>\n
complainant could not fulfill the commitment, therefore, vide letter dated<\/p>\n
5.3.2008 (Annexure P-5) the petitioner exercised his right of lien on all the<\/p>\n
machinaries and equipments available at the site to take possession and also<\/p>\n
declared that agreement dated 10.3.2005 (Annexure P-2) and addendum<\/p>\n
dated 28.9.2006 (Annexure P-4) stand cancelled. It is further submitted that<\/p>\n
on 10.3.2008, the petitioner had to issue legal notice (Annexure P-6) to the<\/p>\n
complainant on the ground that all the five cheques of Rs.10 lacs were<\/p>\n
dishonoured on the ground of `Insufficiency of funds’ but due to some<\/p>\n
amicable settlement between the parties, the said legal notice (Annexure P-<\/p>\n
6) was withdrawn on 10.3.2008 vide letter (Annexure P-7) and thereafter on<\/p>\n
25.3.2008 memorandum of understanding (Annexure P-8) was also<\/p>\n
executed between the parties according to which construction work was to<\/p>\n
be finished by the complainant by 31.3.2008 positively. Since the work was<\/p>\n
not completed, therefore, the petitioner sent a letter of termination of<\/p>\n
contract on 29.8.2008 (Annexure P-10) and on 29.8.2008 he also made a<\/p>\n
complaint to the Commissioner of Police, Gurgaon against the complainant<\/p>\n
that they are threatening the employees of the petitioner. On 20.9.2008, the<\/p>\n
petitioner also informed the complainant that since there is clause No.16<\/p>\n
with regard to resolving the dispute through Arbitrator, therefore, they were
\n CRM-M No.32091 of 2008 (O&M)                -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
requested to appoint a sole arbitrator. In the present case, the complainant<\/p>\n
filed a reply to the bail application to which the petitioner had also filed a<\/p>\n
rejoinder. Besides that the complainant filed an application under Section<\/p>\n
340 Cr.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
              In response to the arguments raised by the counsel for the<\/p>\n
petitioner, counsel for the complainant has vehemently argued that offence<\/p>\n
under Section 420 IPC is apparent on the face of it as from the beginning<\/p>\n
the complainant was allured by the petitioner for the construction of flats by<\/p>\n
assuring him that it is a cash rich company and all the payments shall be<\/p>\n
made in time. It is further submitted that Section 406 IPC is also made out<\/p>\n
on the basis of the allegations made in the FIR. Since the complainant has<\/p>\n
threatened by the petitioner, therefore, Section 506 IPC is also made out. It<\/p>\n
is further submitted by the counsel for the complainant that an amount of<\/p>\n
Rs.2.92 Crores is still due towards the petitioner, which has not been paid so<\/p>\n
far. Learned counsel for the complainant has further argued that in view of<\/p>\n
the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Adri Dharan Das Vs. State<\/p>\n
of West Bengal (2005) 4 SCC 303, the petitioner is not entitled to<\/p>\n
anticipatory bail.\n<\/p>\n
              In response to this argument, counsel for the petitioner has<\/p>\n
relied upon decision of the Apex Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia etc. Vs.<\/p>\n
The State of Punjab AIR 1980 SC 1632 and Savitri Agarwal & Othres<\/p>\n
Vs. State of Maharashtra and another 2009(4) Recent Apex Judgments<\/p>\n
516. Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that in terms of the<\/p>\n
order passed by this Court dated 11.12.2008, the petitioner has already<\/p>\n
joined the investigation. This fact is not disputed by the counsel for the<\/p>\n
State.\n<\/p>\n
 CRM-M No.32091 of 2008 (O&M)                -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
             I have given my thoughtful consideration to the respective<\/p>\n
contentions raised by the counsel for the parties and have perused the record<\/p>\n
with their assistance.\n<\/p>\n
             The resume of the facts originated from the documents on<\/p>\n
record shows that it is a business dispute between the parties in which<\/p>\n
agreement,    addendum    to   agreement    and   even    memorandum      of<\/p>\n
understanding have been executed for the purpose of execution of<\/p>\n
construction work, which has been delayed for one reason or the other. It is<\/p>\n
also brought to the notice of the Court that after a request made by the<\/p>\n
petitioner to the complainant for the appointment of arbitrator (Annexure P-<\/p>\n
12), a petition has already been filed before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court<\/p>\n
for the purpose of appointment of an Arbitrator on 29.5.2009 in which<\/p>\n
notice of motion has been issued for 11.9.2009. This Court has found that it<\/p>\n
is a dispute with regard to accounting and interpretation of the relevant<\/p>\n
provisions of the agreement between the parties because the petitioner is<\/p>\n
claiming lien of the plot and machinery on the basis of Clause 3 of the<\/p>\n
addendum to the agreement dated 10.3.2005 (Annexure P-2) and the<\/p>\n
complainant is claiming escalation in the cost price on the basis of<\/p>\n
memorandum of understanding (Annexure P-8) dated 25.3.2008. It is<\/p>\n
worthwhile to mention that both addendum (Annexure P-4) and<\/p>\n
memorandum of understanding (Annexure P-8) are the part of the main<\/p>\n
agreement (Annexure P-2). Since the entire dispute is based upon<\/p>\n
documents which according to the petitioner, have already been submitted<\/p>\n
to the Investigating Officer and that the petitioner has joined the<\/p>\n
investigation, therefore, order dated 11.12.2008 is made absolute. It is<\/p>\n
however, directed that petitioner shall join the investigation as and when
\n CRM-M No.32091 of 2008 (O&M)                -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
called for. He shall also abide by the provisions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.<\/p>\n
            The petition is disposed of.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n                                           (Rakesh Kumar Jain)\n21.8.2009                                        Judge\nMeenu\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Tushar Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 21 August, 2009 CRM-M No.32091 of 2008 (O&M) -1- IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.32091 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 21.8.2009 Tushar Kumar ..Petitioner. Vs. State of Haryana and another ..Respondents. CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN […]<\/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-173215","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nTushar Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 21 August, 2009 - 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\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Tushar Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 21 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-08-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-10-15T16:48:04+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\\\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Tushar Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 21 August, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-15T16:48:04+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1666,\"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\\\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009\",\"name\":\"Tushar Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 21 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-10-15T16:48:04+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Tushar Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 21 August, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Tushar Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 21 August, 2009 - 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\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Tushar Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 21 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-08-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-10-15T16:48:04+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\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Tushar Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 21 August, 2009","datePublished":"2009-08-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-15T16:48:04+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009"},"wordCount":1666,"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\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009","name":"Tushar Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 21 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-10-15T16:48:04+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/tushar-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-and-another-on-21-august-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Tushar Kumar vs State Of Haryana And Another on 21 August, 2009"}]},{"@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\/173215","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=173215"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/173215\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=173215"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=173215"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=173215"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}