{"id":189323,"date":"2009-09-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-09-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009"},"modified":"2018-06-11T22:25:59","modified_gmt":"2018-06-11T16:55:59","slug":"supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009","title":{"rendered":"Supreet Singh Dilawar vs State Of U.T. on 5 September, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Supreet Singh Dilawar vs State Of U.T. on 5 September, 2009<\/div>\n
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT\n              CHANDIGARH\n\n\n                             Crl.Misc.No.16692 of 2009 (O&M)\n\n                             Date of decision : 5.9.2009\n\nSupreet Singh Dilawar\n\n                                               ....Petitioner\n               Versus\n\n\nState of U.T., Chandigarh\n\n                                              ...Respondent\n\n\nCORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER\n                  ....\n\nPresent:   Mr.Manish Bhardwaj, Advocate\n           for the petitioner.\n\n           Mr. Hemant Bassi, Advocate\n           for the respondent.\n                         .....\n\nMAHESH GROVER, J.\n<\/pre>\n
             This is a petition under Section 439 of the Code of<\/p>\n
Criminal Procedure read with Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care<\/p>\n
and Protection of Children)Act, 2000 for grant of bail in case FIR<\/p>\n
No.89 dated 5.5.2009 under Sections 354, 376, 377, 506, 511, 292<\/p>\n
IPC and Section 67-B (b&e) of I.T.Act, registered at Police Station<\/p>\n
Sector 31, Chandigarh.\n<\/p>\n
             The petitioner who is a juvenile is facing the allegations<\/p>\n
under the aforesaid offences. He is in custody since 5.5.2009. The<\/p>\n
Principal Judge, Juvenile Justice Court, Chandigarh        declined the<\/p>\n
prayer of the petitioner on the ground that a heinous offence has been<\/p>\n
committed.\n<\/p>\n
 Crl.Misc.No.16692 of 2009 (O&M)                -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
             The learned counsel for the petitioner while assailing the<\/p>\n
impugned order dated 20.5.2009 has contended that the petitioner<\/p>\n
being a juvenile is entitled to the concession of bail in accordance<\/p>\n
with the provisions of Section 12 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and<\/p>\n
Protection of Children) Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’)<\/p>\n
and the impugned orders are unsustainable in the eyes of law.<\/p>\n
             On the other hand, learned counsel for the Union<\/p>\n
Territory, Chandigarh has contended that the petitioner is involved in<\/p>\n
a serious offence and he does not deserve the concession of bail even<\/p>\n
if he is a juvenile.\n<\/p>\n
             I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.<\/p>\n
             Section 12 of the Act reads as under :-\n<\/p>\n
                         “Bail of juvenile. –(1) When any person<\/p>\n
             accused of a bailable or non-bailable offence, and<\/p>\n
             apparently a juvenile, is arrested or detained or appears or<\/p>\n
             is   brought   before   a   Board,      such   person   shall,<\/p>\n
             notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of<\/p>\n
             Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law<\/p>\n
             for the time being in force, be released on bail with or<\/p>\n
             without surety or placed under the supervision of a<\/p>\n
             Probation Officer or under the care of any fit institution or<\/p>\n
             fit person but he shall not be so released if there appear<\/p>\n
             reasonable grounds for believing that the release is likely<\/p>\n
             to bring him into association with any known criminal or<\/p>\n
             expose him to moral, physical or psychological danger or<\/p>\n
             that his release would defeat the ends of justice.
\n Crl.Misc.No.16692 of 2009 (O&M)                -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
                        (2) When such person having been arrested is<\/p>\n
            not released on bail under sub-section (1) by the officer<\/p>\n
            incharge of the police station, such officer shall cause him<\/p>\n
            to be kept only in an observation home in the prescribed<\/p>\n
            manner until he can be brought before a Board.\n<\/p>\n
                        (3) When such person is not released on bail<\/p>\n
            under sub-section (1) by the Board it shall, instead of<\/p>\n
            committing him to prison, make an order sending him to<\/p>\n
            an observation home or a place of safety for such period<\/p>\n
            during the pendency of the inquiry regarding him as may<\/p>\n
            be specified in the order.”\n<\/p>\n
            According to the aforesaid section, a juvenile may not be<\/p>\n
released on bail if there appears a reasonable ground for believing<\/p>\n
that the release of the petitioner is likely to bring him into association<\/p>\n
with any known criminal or expose him to moral, physical or<\/p>\n
psychological danger or that his release would defeat the ends of<\/p>\n
justice. If the facts of the case and the material on record is to be<\/p>\n
reconciled in view of the aforesaid provisions of law,then it seems<\/p>\n
that the apprehension of the Principal Judge seems to be misplaced.<\/p>\n
             The entire purpose of the Act is reformatory and keeping<\/p>\n
in view this purpose in mind the provisions of Section 15 have been<\/p>\n
enacted which lays down as follows :-\n<\/p>\n
                         “Order that may be passed regarding<\/p>\n
            juvenile.– (1) Where a Board is satisfied on inquiry that<\/p>\n
            a    juvenile    has    committed        an   offence,   then,<\/p>\n
            notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any
\n Crl.Misc.No.16692 of 2009 (O&M)             -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
          other law for the time being in force, the Board may, if it<\/p>\n
          so thinks fit, —\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          (a)    allow the juvenile to go home after advice or<\/p>\n
                 admonition following appropriate inquiry against<\/p>\n
                 and counselling to the parent or the guardian and<\/p>\n
                 the juvenile;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          (b)    direct the juvenile to participate in group<\/p>\n
                 counselling and similar activities;<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          (c)    order the juvenile to perform community service;<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          (d)    order the parent of the juvenile or the juvenile<\/p>\n
                 himself to pay a fine, if he is over fourteen years of<\/p>\n
                 age and earns money;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          (e)    direct the juvenile to be released on probation of<\/p>\n
                 good conduct and placed under the care of any<\/p>\n
                 parent, guardian or other fit person, on such parent,<\/p>\n
                 guardian or other fit person executing a bond, with<\/p>\n
                 or without surety, as the Board may require, for the<\/p>\n
                  good behaviour and well-being of the juvenile for<\/p>\n
                  any period not exceeding three years;<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          (f)    direct the juvenile to be released on probation of<\/p>\n
                 good conduct and placed under the care of any fit<\/p>\n
                 institution for the good behaviour and well-being<\/p>\n
                 of the juvenile for any period not exceeding three<\/p>\n
                 years;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          (g)    make an order directing the juvenile to be sent to a<\/p>\n
                 special home for a period of three years:
\n Crl.Misc.No.16692 of 2009 (O&M)             -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
                Provided that the Board may, if it is satisfied that<\/p>\n
          having regard to the nature of the offence and the<\/p>\n
          circumstances of the case, it is expedient so to do , for<\/p>\n
          reasons to be recorded, reduce the period of stay to such<\/p>\n
          period as it thinks fit.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                       (2) The Board shall obtain the social<\/p>\n
          investigation report on juvenile either through a<\/p>\n
          probation officer or a recognised voluntary organisation<\/p>\n
          or otherwise, and shall take into consideration the<\/p>\n
          findings of such report before passing an order.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                       (3) Where an order under clause (d), clause<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          (e) or clause (f) of sub-section (1) is made, the Board<\/p>\n
          may, if it is of opinion that in the interests of the juvenile<\/p>\n
          and of the public, it is expedient so to do, in addition<\/p>\n
          make an order that the juvenile in conflict with law shall<\/p>\n
          remain under the supervision of a probation officer<\/p>\n
          named in the order during such period, not exceeding<\/p>\n
          three years as may be specified therein, and may in such<\/p>\n
          supervision order impose such conditions as it deems<\/p>\n
          necessary for the due supervision of the juvenile in<\/p>\n
          conflict with law:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
               Provided that if at any time afterwards it appears to<\/p>\n
          the Board on receiving a report from the probation<\/p>\n
          officer or otherwise, that the juvenile in conflict with law<\/p>\n
          has not been of good behaviour during the period of<\/p>\n
          supervision or that the fit institution under whose care
\n Crl.Misc.No.16692 of 2009 (O&M)               -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
            the juvenile was placed is no longer able or willing to<\/p>\n
            ensure the good behaviour and well-being of the juvenile<\/p>\n
            it may, after making such inquiry as it deems fit, order<\/p>\n
            the juvenile in conflict with law to be sent to a special<\/p>\n
            home.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                        (4) The Board shall while making a<\/p>\n
            supervision order under sub-section (3), explain to the<\/p>\n
            juvenile and the parent, guardian or other fit person or fit<\/p>\n
            institution, as the case may be, under whose care the<\/p>\n
            juvenile has been placed, the terms and conditions of the<\/p>\n
            order and shall forthwith furnish one copy of the<\/p>\n
            supervision order to the juvenile, the parent, guardian or<\/p>\n
            other fit person or fit institution, as the case may be, the<\/p>\n
            sureties, if any, and the probation officer.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            The aforesaid functions are to be carried out by the<\/p>\n
Juvenile Justice Board. It envisages broad number of functions and<\/p>\n
duties that the Board has to carry out to ensure that the juvenile who<\/p>\n
has come in conflict with law by going astray comes into the main<\/p>\n
stream. The matters which have been enlisted in Section 15 of the Act<\/p>\n
are not to be construed as exclusive but the Board has to act in the<\/p>\n
spirit of the law and ensure that the purpose for which it is enacted is<\/p>\n
carried out. For that purpose the Board at the time of considering the<\/p>\n
bail application of a juvenile ought to explore the possibility of<\/p>\n
resorting to the options which have been entailed in Section 15 of the<\/p>\n
Act which includes group counselling and counselling through the<\/p>\n
agencies of professional counsellors to such delinquent juveniles so
\n Crl.Misc.No.16692 of 2009 (O&M)                -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
that the process of reforming them is put on track.<\/p>\n
            The Principal Magistrate is to act by imbibing the spirit<\/p>\n
of the statute and not merely act by sticking to the letter of the statute<\/p>\n
while stripping it of its soul.\n<\/p>\n
            If the provisions of the Act are to be seen, then the very<\/p>\n
appointment of a Principal Magistrate is to be made from persons<\/p>\n
who have special knowledge or training in child psychology or child<\/p>\n
welfare. Section 4 (2) of the Act provides the constitution of the<\/p>\n
Board which shall consist of a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial<\/p>\n
Magistrate of the first class, as the case may be and two social<\/p>\n
workers of whom at least one shall be a woman, forming a Bench and<\/p>\n
every such Bench shall have the powers conferred by the Code of<\/p>\n
Criminal Procedure. The Magistrate shall be designated as a Principal<\/p>\n
Magistrate. Section 4(3) further provides that no Magistrate shall be<\/p>\n
appointed as a member of the Board unless he has special knowledge<\/p>\n
or training in child psychology or child welfare and no social worker<\/p>\n
shall be appointed as a member of the Board unless he has been<\/p>\n
actively involved in health, education or welfare activities pertaining<\/p>\n
to children for at least seven years. Section 4(5) of the Act provides<\/p>\n
for removal of any member of the Board on the grounds which have<\/p>\n
been enumerated therein which include the failure to attend the<\/p>\n
proceedings of the Board for consecutive three months.<\/p>\n
            The emphasis of the Principal Magistrate having<\/p>\n
knowledge or training in child psychology or child welfare seemingly<\/p>\n
is not being adhered to which is leading to a situation where a<\/p>\n
Principal Magistrate addresses the concern of a juvenile with a mind
\n Crl.Misc.No.16692 of 2009 (O&M)              -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
set of an ordinary court dealing with an accused, often resulting in<\/p>\n
harshness of an approach which is totally contrary to the spirit of the<\/p>\n
Act.\n<\/p>\n
           The Court is also concerned with the larger aspect of the<\/p>\n
matter as to whether the Boards constituted are actually meeting<\/p>\n
regularly along with its members or is the process being observed<\/p>\n
more in    violence than in adherence. It is incumbent upon the<\/p>\n
Principal Magistrate while dealing with the matters under Section 12<\/p>\n
of the Act to simultaneously pass orders under the provisions of<\/p>\n
Section 15 of the Act and not merely pass an order shutting out the<\/p>\n
concession of bail as also shutting out any of the options available<\/p>\n
under Section 15 of the Act. In fact, even before the Principal<\/p>\n
Magistrate or the Board proceeds to determine the matter under<\/p>\n
Section 12, the compliance of procedure under Section 10 has to be<\/p>\n
ensured where police has to produce the juvenile before the Board<\/p>\n
without any loss of time and within 24 hours of his being<\/p>\n
apprehended.\n<\/p>\n
           Reverting back to the facts of the case, it is appalling to<\/p>\n
note that the order of the Principal Judge does not take into<\/p>\n
consideration any of the aforesaid steps either undertaken by the<\/p>\n
Board or by the Magistrate himself by referring the matter to the<\/p>\n
Board. As a result the order merely pays lip service to the provisions<\/p>\n
of law without making any endeavour to reconcile it with the spirit<\/p>\n
with which the enactment has been created.\n<\/p>\n
           The court while evaluating the chance of harm to a<\/p>\n
juvenile in conflict with law, has to base its opinion on some
\n Crl.Misc.No.16692 of 2009 (O&M)              -9-<\/span><\/p>\n
material, which necessarily may not stem from the gravity of the<\/p>\n
offence. Therefore it should while dealing with bail under Section 12,<\/p>\n
simultaneously explore the options given in Section 15, which should<\/p>\n
also include the opinion of a professional counsellor so as to come to<\/p>\n
a conclusion that his enlargement on bail is likely to or not likely to<\/p>\n
expose him to a known criminal or expose him to moral physical or<\/p>\n
psychological danger.\n<\/p>\n
            In this case the Principal Judge has not kept in mind the<\/p>\n
requirement of Section 12 of the Act while declining the bail to a<\/p>\n
juvenile. The reason given is a mere piracy of language of the statute<\/p>\n
which more or less has been influenced by the gravity of the offence;<\/p>\n
and merely because he committed a heinous offence cannot be made<\/p>\n
a ground for not releasing the petitioner on bail. I find strength and<\/p>\n
sustenance in the observations made by the Supreme Court in Partap<\/p>\n
Singh v. State of Jharkhand and another, 2005(3) S.C.C. 551 which<\/p>\n
read as under :-\n<\/p>\n
            “8. Thus, the whole object of the Act is to provide for the<\/p>\n
            care,    protection,    treatment,     development         and<\/p>\n
            rehabilitation of neglected delinquent juveniles. It is a<\/p>\n
            beneficial legislation aimed at to make available the<\/p>\n
            benefit of the Act to the neglected or delinquent<\/p>\n
            juveniles. It is settled law that the interpretation of the<\/p>\n
            Statute of beneficial legislation must be to advance the<\/p>\n
            cause of legislation to the benefit for whom it is made<\/p>\n
            and not to frustrate the intendment of the legislation.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            In this view of the matter and for the reasons which have
\n Crl.Misc.No.16692 of 2009 (O&M)              -10-<\/span><\/p>\n
been stated above, the present petition is accepted and the petitioner<\/p>\n
is directed to be released on bail to the satisfaction of Principal<\/p>\n
Judge, Juvenile Justice Court, Chandigarh. However, before releasing<\/p>\n
the petitioner on bail the court shall ensure that the father of the<\/p>\n
petitioner furnishes an affidavit and undertaking to the Court that he<\/p>\n
shall ensure that his son does not repeat any such occurrence. The<\/p>\n
Principal Judge through the agency of the Board shall also ensure that<\/p>\n
regular counselling is provided to the petitioner in order to obviate<\/p>\n
the recurrence of any such act.\n<\/p>\n
           Before parting with the order this Court deems it<\/p>\n
appropriate to issue directions to all the Principal Magistrates in the<\/p>\n
State of Punjab and Haryana conferred with the powers under the Act<\/p>\n
and the Advocates General, Haryana and Punjab and the Standing<\/p>\n
Counsel of U.T., Chandigarh to place on record the requisite material<\/p>\n
showing the following :-\n<\/p>\n
i)      The constitution of the Board and the manner in which two<\/p>\n
        social workers have been appointed to the Board and whether<\/p>\n
        they fulfill the conditions prescribed in Section 4(2) and 4(3)<\/p>\n
        of the Act;\n<\/p>\n
ii)     Whether the proceedings of the Board are being conducted<\/p>\n
        regularly and if so, at what intervals and whether all the<\/p>\n
        members are attending the proceedings or not;\n<\/p>\n
iii)    Whether on apprehension of a juvenile the procedure under<\/p>\n
        Section 10 of the Act is being followed or not; and<\/p>\n
iv)     Whether the Principal Magistrates are complying with the
\n        provisions of Section 15 of the Act while determining the
\n        matters which come up for consideration before the Board
\n Crl.Misc.No.16692 of 2009 (O&M)             -11-<\/span><\/p>\n
       including the grant of bails under Section 12 of the Act.<\/p>\n
       List for further proceedings on 28.10.2009.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
September 5, 2009                      (MAHESH GROVER)\n                                            JUDGE\ndss\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Supreet Singh Dilawar vs State Of U.T. on 5 September, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.16692 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision : 5.9.2009 Supreet Singh Dilawar ….Petitioner Versus State of U.T., Chandigarh …Respondent CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER …. Present: Mr.Manish Bhardwaj, Advocate for […]<\/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-189323","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nSupreet Singh Dilawar vs State Of U.T. on 5 September, 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\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Supreet Singh Dilawar vs State Of U.T. on 5 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-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=\"2009-09-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-11T16:55:59+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=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Supreet Singh Dilawar vs State Of U.T. on 5 September, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-11T16:55:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009\"},\"wordCount\":2507,\"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\\\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009\",\"name\":\"Supreet Singh Dilawar vs State Of U.T. on 5 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-11T16:55:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Supreet Singh Dilawar vs State Of U.T. on 5 September, 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":"Supreet Singh Dilawar vs State Of U.T. on 5 September, 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\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Supreet Singh Dilawar vs State Of U.T. on 5 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-09-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-11T16:55:59+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":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Supreet Singh Dilawar vs State Of U.T. on 5 September, 2009","datePublished":"2009-09-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-11T16:55:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009"},"wordCount":2507,"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\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009","name":"Supreet Singh Dilawar vs State Of U.T. on 5 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-09-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-11T16:55:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/supreet-singh-dilawar-vs-state-of-u-t-on-5-september-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Supreet Singh Dilawar vs State Of U.T. on 5 September, 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\/189323","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=189323"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/189323\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=189323"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=189323"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=189323"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}