{"id":177460,"date":"2010-08-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-08-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010"},"modified":"2015-11-18T14:57:25","modified_gmt":"2015-11-18T09:27:25","slug":"kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010","title":{"rendered":"Kallu And (2) Others. vs State Of U.P. on 9 August, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Allahabad High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Kallu And (2) Others. vs State Of U.P. on 9 August, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>      Reserved\n\n                     Criminal Revision No.264 of 2000\n\nKallu and others.                       .......................Revisionists\n                                 Vs.\nState of U.P.                             ................   Opposite Party\n\nHon'ble Vedpal,J.\n<\/pre>\n<p>     This revision under Section 397\/401 Cr.P.C. is directed against<br \/>\nthe judgment and order passed by Shri Sant Lal Ram, H.J.S., the then<br \/>\nAdditional Sessions Judge\/Special Judge, SC &amp; ST Act, Barabanki in<br \/>\nCriminal Appeal No.28 of 1999 : Kallu and two others Vs. State of<br \/>\nU.P. whereby the appeal preferred against the judgment and order<br \/>\ndated 29.5.1999 passed by Shri S.C.Sharma, P.C.S.(J), A.C.J.M.,<br \/>\nBarabanki in Criminal Case No.917 of 1997 (Crime No.17 of 1997) :<br \/>\nState Vs. Kallu convicting and sentencing the appellants for the<br \/>\noffence punishable under Section 323\/34 to undergo simple<br \/>\nimprisonment for a period of six months, for the offence punishable<br \/>\nunder Section 324\/34 to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of<br \/>\nsix months, for the offence punishable under Section 504 I.P.C. to<br \/>\nundergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and for the<br \/>\noffence punishable under Section 506 I.P.C. to undergo simple<br \/>\nimprisonment for a period of six months, was dismissed and the<br \/>\nabove conviction and sentence were confirmed.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Prosecution version as is revealing from the record is that on<br \/>\n2.5.1997, at about 5.00 p.m., Pancham, brother of the first informant<br \/>\nRamji, resident of Atrauli, which lies within the circle of police<br \/>\nstation Zaidpur, District Barabanki had gone on the fields for grazing<br \/>\nthe cattle. It is further stated that accused Kallu, Arju and Jagjeevan<br \/>\n(revisionists herein) reached there having lathi and banka with them<br \/>\nand started abusing Pancham. On an altercation, Laxmi Narain and<br \/>\nothers reached there. The accused persons started beating Pancham<br \/>\nas a result of which he sustained injuries. This incident was also<br \/>\nwitnessed by Ram Sewak and Badlu who rescued Pancham from the<br \/>\naccused persons. Thereafter, accused persons left the place of incident<br \/>\nabusing and intimidating Pancham. A report of the said incident was<br \/>\n lodged by Ramji, complainant at the police station and Pancham was<br \/>\ngot medically examined. The investigation of the case was taken up<br \/>\nby Sub Inspector Shiv Sharan Singh Parihar who after investigation,<br \/>\nsubmitted the chargesheet against the accused persons for the offence<br \/>\npunishable under Section 323, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C. The accused were<br \/>\ncharged for the said offences by the learned trial court who pleaded<br \/>\nnot guilty to be charged and claimed to be tried.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The prosecution in order to prove its case, has examined seven<br \/>\nwitnesses in all out of whom P.W.-1 Ram Ji is the first informant. He<br \/>\nis not an eye witness to the incident. P.W.-2 Pancham is the injured<br \/>\nwitness itself.   P.W.-3 Badlu, P.W.-4 Ram Sewak are the alleged<br \/>\nindependent eye witness of the incident. P.W.-5 Constable Madan<br \/>\nSingh is a formal witness.      P.W.-6 V.K. Sharma had medically<br \/>\nexamined Pancham after the incident. He has deposed on the factum<br \/>\nof injury sustained by Pancham during the incident. P.W.-7 Sub<br \/>\nInspector Shiv Sharan Singh Parihar is the investigating Officer who<br \/>\nafter completing investigation, submitted chargesheet against the<br \/>\naccused persons and he has deposed on the factum of investigation.<br \/>\nNo other witness was testified by the prosecution to prove its case.<br \/>\nThe accused persons in their statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.<br \/>\ndenied the prosecution allegations and stated that they have been<br \/>\nfalsely involved in the case.    The learned Magistrate after going<br \/>\nthrough the evidence on record, reached to the conclusion that the<br \/>\ncharge stand proved against accused persons and he accordingly<br \/>\nconvicted the accused persons.      Feeling aggrieved with the said<br \/>\njudgment, an appeal was preferred by the accused persons which was<br \/>\nalso dismissed and judgment and order of conviction passed by the<br \/>\nlearned court below was confirmed. Feeling aggrieved with the said<br \/>\njudgement and orders passed by the courts below, the accused have<br \/>\npreferred this revision.\n<\/p>\n<p>      I have heard the learned counsel for the revisionists as well as<br \/>\nlearned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the case. The<br \/>\nrevision is not being pressed on the legality of conviction by the<br \/>\nlearned counsel for the revisionists.      It has been rightly done.<br \/>\n Learned trial court had recorded the statements of seven witnesses in<br \/>\nall out of whom two witnesses were independent eye witnesses and<br \/>\none was injured witness. The rest were formal witnesses. All the<br \/>\nwitnesses have supported the prosecution version. There was nothing<br \/>\nin their testimony to disbelieve the prosecution version or to doubt<br \/>\nthe veracity of the prosecution story. Learned appellate court also on<br \/>\nappraisal of the evidence, reached to the conclusion that appellants<br \/>\nhad been rightly convicted and sentenced. Thus there is concurrent<br \/>\nfinding that the accused appellants had committed the offence in<br \/>\nquestion and they were rightly convicted.\n<\/p>\n<p>      On the question of sentence, it has been submitted by the<br \/>\nlearned counsel for the revisionists that the revisionists are not<br \/>\nprevious convict.   They are poor and simple person, resident of<br \/>\nvillage and the incident had occurred all of a sudden in the heat of<br \/>\npassion and revisionists had no shady antecedents and they are<br \/>\nrunning their livelihood by dent of their hard work in agriculture. It<br \/>\nwas further submitted that it was mandatory for the court below to<br \/>\ndeal with the accused persons under the provisions of Probation of<br \/>\nOffender Act as the offence for which the revisionists have been<br \/>\nconvicted, is of petty nature, the injuries are simple and the maximum<br \/>\nsentence awarded to the revisionists is two years and in this<br \/>\ncircumstance, they should have been dealt with under the provisions<br \/>\nof Probation of Offenders Act, 1958.\n<\/p>\n<p>      It reveals from the perusal of Section 361 Cr.P.C. that it is<br \/>\nmandatory for the court to record in its judgment the special reasons<br \/>\nfor not releasing the offender on probation of good conduct. In the<br \/>\npresent case, neither the trial court nor the lower appellate court has<br \/>\nrecorded the reasons to deprive the revisionists from the benefit of<br \/>\nProbation of Offender Act, 1958.       The accused are not habitual<br \/>\ncriminals and they have no criminal antecedents. It will not be proper<br \/>\nto send them jail for the incident which had occurred 13 years back.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the<br \/>\nthe antecedents, the fact that the incident had taken place about 13<br \/>\nyears before, and the offence are not of grave nature, I am of the<br \/>\n opinion that the revisionists should be given benefit of Section 4 of<br \/>\nthe Probation of Offender Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>      In view of the above, the revision should be partly allowed by<br \/>\nmaintaining the conviction but suspending the sentence awarded to<br \/>\nthem and giving benefit of section 4 of the Probation of Offenders<br \/>\nAct to the revisionists.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The revision is therefore, allowed in part to the extent that the<br \/>\nconviction recorded by the court below against the revisionists are<br \/>\nmaintained but the sentence awarded to them is suspended and it is<br \/>\ndirected that the revisionists shall be released on probation of good<br \/>\nconduct for a period of two years under the provisions of Section 4 of<br \/>\nthe Probation of Offender Act, 1958 from the date of their furnishing<br \/>\na personal bond of Rs.15,000\/- with one reliable sureties in the like<br \/>\namount to the satisfaction of the trial court to the effect that the<br \/>\nrevisionists shall appear to receive sentence within the said period of<br \/>\ntwo years as and when called upon by the court concerned and in the<br \/>\nmeantime, to keep peace and be of good behaviour.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The above bonds shall be executed before the court below<br \/>\nwithin a period of one month from today. In case the revisionists fails<br \/>\nto comply the above direction, the revision shall stand dismissed and<br \/>\nthe sentence shall restore.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.8.2010.\n<\/p>\n<p>Shukla.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Allahabad High Court Kallu And (2) Others. vs State Of U.P. on 9 August, 2010 Reserved Criminal Revision No.264 of 2000 Kallu and others. &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..Revisionists Vs. State of U.P. &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. Opposite Party Hon&#8217;ble Vedpal,J. This revision under Section 397\/401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order passed by Shri Sant Lal Ram, H.J.S., the [&hellip;]<\/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":[9,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-177460","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allahabad-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Kallu And (2) Others. vs State Of U.P. on 9 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Kallu And (2) Others. vs State Of U.P. on 9 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-08-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-11-18T09:27:25+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Kallu And (2) Others. vs State Of U.P. on 9 August, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-18T09:27:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1281,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Allahabad High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010\",\"name\":\"Kallu And (2) Others. vs State Of U.P. on 9 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-08-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-11-18T09:27:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Kallu And (2) Others. vs State Of U.P. on 9 August, 2010\"}]},{\"@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":"Kallu And (2) Others. vs State Of U.P. on 9 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Kallu And (2) Others. vs State Of U.P. on 9 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-08-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-11-18T09:27:25+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Kallu And (2) Others. vs State Of U.P. on 9 August, 2010","datePublished":"2010-08-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-18T09:27:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010"},"wordCount":1281,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Allahabad High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010","name":"Kallu And (2) Others. vs State Of U.P. on 9 August, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-08-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-11-18T09:27:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/kallu-and-2-others-vs-state-of-u-p-on-9-august-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Kallu And (2) Others. vs State Of U.P. on 9 August, 2010"}]},{"@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\/177460","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=177460"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/177460\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=177460"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=177460"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=177460"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}