{"id":190794,"date":"2008-12-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008"},"modified":"2018-06-26T08:57:21","modified_gmt":"2018-06-26T03:27:21","slug":"hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008","title":{"rendered":"Hardial Singh & Others vs Bachan Singh & Another on 1 December, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Hardial Singh & Others vs Bachan Singh & Another on 1 December, 2008<\/div>\n
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH\n\n\n\n                       Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-31679 of 2004\n                                   Date of Decision: December 01, 2008\n\n\nHardial Singh & Others\n                                                             .....PETITIONER(S)\n\n                                       VERSUS\n\n\nBachan Singh & Another\n                                                            .....RESPONDENT(S)<\/pre>\n
                                .        .      .\n\n\nCORAM:               HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA\n\n\nPRESENT: -           Mr. A.P.S. Deol, Advocate, for the\n                     petitioners.\n\n                     Mr.   J.S.   Lalli,                Advocate,         for\n                     Mr.   T.S.  Sangha,                Advocate,         for\n                     respondent No.1.\n\n                     Mr. Kamaldeep Singh                    Sidhu, Deputy\n                     Advocate    General,                   Punjab,   for\n                     respondent No.2.\n\n\n                                   .     .      .\n\nAJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)\n\n                 This        petition         has      been     filed     under\n\nSection    482    Cr.P.C.          for       quashing       complaint     dated\n\n4.5.2002       filed     for       commission          of     offence     under\n\nSection    3    of     the     Scheduled            Castes    and   Scheduled\n\nTribes    (Prevention          of       Atrocities)          Act,   1989    and\n\n<\/pre>\n
Section 506 IPC, and the order of summoning dated<\/p>\n
6.1.2003, Annexure P-6.\n<\/p>\n
                 Without adverting to the facts, suffice<\/p>\n
it to say that initially FIR No.57 dated 7.4.2001<\/p>\n
under     Section       3     of        the     Scheduled        Castes     and
\n Crl. Misc. No. M-31679 of 2008                                [2]<\/p>\n
Scheduled       Tribes      (Prevention      of    Atrocities)      Act,<\/p>\n
1989 and Section 506 IPC was registered in Police<\/p>\n
Station, Rampura, District Bathinda, at the instance<\/p>\n
of Bachan Singh, respondent NO.1. The FIR has been<\/p>\n
placed on record as Annexure P-1. Investigation was<\/p>\n
conducted and on the basis of report, cancellation<\/p>\n
of the case was ordered. Along therewith, it was<\/p>\n
directed that the proceedings be initiated against<\/p>\n
the respondent-complainant under Section 182 Cr.P.C.<\/p>\n
The cancellation report has been placed on record as<\/p>\n
Annexure P-2.\n<\/p>\n
                   It seems that cancellation report was<\/p>\n
not accepted and the matter was sent for further<\/p>\n
investigation vide Order dated 18.1.2003. The matter<\/p>\n
was again investigated and the investigating agency<\/p>\n
again concluded that the case is false. Second time,<\/p>\n
cancellation report dated 16.6.2003 was prepared and<\/p>\n
submitted.       Notice      was   issued    to    the   complainant.<\/p>\n
After recording the statement of the complainant, it<\/p>\n
was yet again sent for further investigation vide<\/p>\n
Order dated 13.12.2003. On investigation, 3rd time<\/p>\n
again, it has been found by the investigating agency<\/p>\n
that there is          no truth     in   the allegations         as no<\/p>\n
person      from     the     vicinity    has      substantiated     the<\/p>\n
allegations. Cancellation was again prepared the 3rd<\/p>\n
time on 12.5.2004 which has been placed on record as<\/p>\n
Annexure      P-4.     Complaint     dated     4.5.2002     (Annexure<\/p>\n
P-5) at issue in this petition, has been filed. The<\/p>\n
complaint has been considered and the petitioners
\n Crl. Misc. No. M-31679 of 2008                                        [3]<\/p>\n
have been summoned to stand trial vide Order dated<\/p>\n
6.1.2003, Annexure P-6.\n<\/p>\n
                   Learned counsel for the petitioners has<\/p>\n
contended       that       prejudice         has   been     caused    to    the<\/p>\n
petitioners in so much as the Judge, Special Court,<\/p>\n
had referred the matter for further investigation<\/p>\n
for    the    first       time     on    18.1.2003.        The    matter     was<\/p>\n
still under investigation                    on the instructions and<\/p>\n
directions         of     the    Judge,      Special       Court,    however,<\/p>\n
dehors       the     report,          Annexure      P-2,    the     order     of<\/p>\n
summoning has been passed on 6.1.2003.<\/p>\n
                   Learned counsel has further pointed out<\/p>\n
that     on    the        police        report,     the     Special     Court<\/p>\n
proceeded       to      direct        further      investigation       second<\/p>\n
time vide Order dated 13.12.2003. Thus, on the one<\/p>\n
side independently the complaint case has been dealt<\/p>\n
with      whereas           on        the     other        side,      further<\/p>\n
investigation has been ordered. The conduct of the<\/p>\n
petitioners has been investigated and it has been<\/p>\n
concluded by the investigating agency under Chapter<\/p>\n
XII of the Code of Criminal Procedure that there was<\/p>\n
no material to indicate commission of offence by the<\/p>\n
petitioners.              Not         only     this,        first      report<\/p>\n
recommending            cancellation          has      recommended          that<\/p>\n
proceedings          be    initiated         against       the    respondent-<\/p>\n
complainant under Section 182 Cr.P.C. It was legally<\/p>\n
appropriate          for        the     Judge,      Special       Court,      to<\/p>\n
consider the report submitted by the investigating<\/p>\n
agency alongwith complaint and preliminary evidence.\n<\/p>\n
 Crl. Misc. No. M-31679 of 2008                                            [4]\n\n\n\nThis     having       not     been     done,       prejudice          has       been\n\n<\/pre>\n
caused. In this regard, reference has been made to<\/p>\n
Dilawar       Singh     Vs.      State      of     Delhi,        (2008)3           SCC<\/p>\n
(Criminal) 330.\n<\/p>\n
                  I have considered the issue.\n<\/p>\n
                  The       respondent-State             has     filed       reply<\/p>\n
wherein it has been admitted in Para 5 that the<\/p>\n
matter is pending further investigation.<\/p>\n
                  The facts clearly indicate that twice<\/p>\n
over    the     Judge,       Special       Court,        directed        further<\/p>\n
investigation. The investigation is in regard to the<\/p>\n
same    incident        as    is     the     subject        matter       of        the<\/p>\n
complaint.       Further         investigation          has     been     ordered<\/p>\n
under     the    procedure         provided        under       the      Code       of<\/p>\n
Criminal        Procedure,           and      that        too        when          the<\/p>\n
complainant        had       objected        to     the       acceptance            of<\/p>\n
cancellation report. The material collected during<\/p>\n
investigation would assist the process of law and<\/p>\n
administration of criminal justice and particularly<\/p>\n
would help the Court in determining the conduct and<\/p>\n
action     of    the    petitioners          in    the     context        of       the<\/p>\n
allegations made by the respondent.\n<\/p>\n
                  Section 210(1) Cr.P.C. reads thus:-\n<\/p>\n
                      “210. Procedure to be followed when there is a
\n                  complaint case and police investigation in respect of the
\n                  same offence.- (1) When in a case instituted otherwise than
\n                  on a police report (hereinafter referred to as a complaint
\n                  case), it is made to appear to the Magistrate, during the
\n                  course of the inquiry or trial held by him, that an
\n                  investigation by the police is in progress in relation to the
\n                  offence which is the subject-matter of the inquiry or trial
\n                  held by him, the Magistrate shall stay the proceedings of
\n                  such inquiry or trial and call for a report on the matter from
\n                  the police officer conducting the investigation.\n<\/p>\n
 Crl. Misc. No. M-31679 of 2008                                             [5]<\/p>\n
                      (2) If a report is made by the investigating police officer
\n                  under Section 173 and on such report cognizance of any
\n                  offence is taken by the Magistrate against any person who
\n                  is an accused in the complaint case, the Magistrate shall
\n                  inquire into or try together the complaint case and the case
\n                  arising out of the police report as if both the cases were
\n                  instituted on a police report.\n<\/p>\n
                      (3) If the police report does not relate to any accused in
\n                  the complaint case or if the Magistrate does not take
\n                  cognizance of any offence on the police report, he shall
\n                  proceed with the inquiry or trial, which was stayed by him,
\n                  in accordance with the provisions of this Code.”<\/p>\n
                  This issued came to be considered by the<\/p>\n
Hon’ble      Supreme      Court       of     India       in     the       case      of<\/p>\n
Dilawar Singh’s case (supra). Specific reference is<\/p>\n
required to be made to Para 13 and 14:-\n<\/p>\n
                            “13. The principle has been statutorily
\n                  recognised in Section 210 of the CrPC which
\n                  enjoins upon the Magistrate, when it is made to
\n                  appear before him either during the inquiry or the
\n                  trial of a complaint, that a complaint before the
\n                  police is pending investigation in the same matter,
\n                  he is to stop the proceeding in the complaint case
\n                  and is to call for a report from the police. After
\n                  the report is received from the police, he is to take
\n                  up the matter together and if cognizance has been
\n                  taken on the police report, he is to try the
\n                  complaint case along with the GR case as if both
\n                  the cases are instituted upon police report. The
\n                  aim of the provision is to safeguard the interest of
\n                  the accused from unnecessary harassment.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                            14. The provisions of Section 210 CrPC
\n                  are mandatory in nature. It may be true that non-
\n                  compliance of the provisions of Section 210
\n                  CrPC, is not ipso facto fatal to the prosecution
\n                  because of the provision of Section 465 CrPC,
\n                  unless error, omission or irregularity has also
\n                  caused the failure of justice and in determining
\n                  the fact whether there is a failure of justice the
\n                  Court shall have regard to the fact whether the
\n                  objection could and should have been raised at an
\n                  earlier stage in the proceedings. But even
\n                  applying the very same principles it is seen that in
\n                  fact the appellant was in fact prejudiced because
\n                  of the non- production of the records from the
\n                  police.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                  Having         considered             the        facts            and<\/p>\n
circumstances as noticed above, in the context of
\n Crl. Misc. No. M-31679 of 2008                                           [6]<\/p>\n
provisions of Section 210 Cr.P.C. and the judgment<\/p>\n
rendered      by    the    Hon’ble         Supreme       Court    in     Dilawar<\/p>\n
Singh’s case (supra), I am of the opinion that the<\/p>\n
Special Judge has proceeded illegally and considered<\/p>\n
the complaint dehors the report of the investigating<\/p>\n
agency under Section 173 Cr.P.C. Rather the Special<\/p>\n
Judge     having        directed      further        investigation,            was<\/p>\n
required to consider the report to be submitted by<\/p>\n
the       investigating              agency        and       only            after<\/p>\n
consideration of the report in the context of the<\/p>\n
complaint and other material that had come on the<\/p>\n
record,     issue       was      required     to    be    addressed.           This<\/p>\n
having not been done, prejudice has been caused to<\/p>\n
the petitioner. The Court was seized of the matter<\/p>\n
in    having     considered          the    cancellation          report       and<\/p>\n
having       ordered          further        investigation.              Without<\/p>\n
referring          to     the        report        submitted           by       the<\/p>\n
investigating agency, the issue could not have been<\/p>\n
addressed and considered.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                   In     view       of    the     above,        Order       dated<\/p>\n
6.1.2003 is hereby quashed. The matter is remitted<\/p>\n
back to the Magistrate to enable him to proceed in<\/p>\n
accordance with law as noticed hereinabove.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                   The     parties         are     required       to        appear<\/p>\n
before the Magistrate on 22.12.2008.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                   In view of the delay already caused, it<\/p>\n
is    directed      that       the    investigating          agency          shall<\/p>\n
present the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. within<\/p>\n
30 days from today. On consideration of the issue,
\n Crl. Misc. No. M-31679 of 2008               [7]<\/p>\n
the matter would be decided by the Magistrate within<\/p>\n
30 days thereof.<\/p>\n
\n\n                                        (AJAI LAMBA)\nDecember 01, 2008                          JUDGE\navin\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Hardial Singh & Others vs Bachan Singh & Another on 1 December, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-31679 of 2004 Date of Decision: December 01, 2008 Hardial Singh & Others …..PETITIONER(S) VERSUS Bachan Singh & Another …..RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE […]<\/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-190794","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nHardial Singh & Others vs Bachan Singh & Another 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\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-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=\"Hardial Singh & Others vs Bachan Singh & Another on 1 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-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=\"2018-06-26T03:27:21+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Hardial Singh & Others vs Bachan Singh & Another on 1 December, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-26T03:27:21+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1402,\"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\\\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008\",\"name\":\"Hardial Singh & Others vs Bachan Singh & Another 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\":\"2018-06-26T03:27:21+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Hardial Singh & Others vs Bachan Singh & Another 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":"Hardial Singh & Others vs Bachan Singh & Another 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\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Hardial Singh & Others vs Bachan Singh & Another on 1 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-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":"2018-06-26T03:27:21+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Hardial Singh & Others vs Bachan Singh & Another on 1 December, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-26T03:27:21+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008"},"wordCount":1402,"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\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008","name":"Hardial Singh & Others vs Bachan Singh & Another 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":"2018-06-26T03:27:21+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hardial-singh-others-vs-bachan-singh-another-on-1-december-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Hardial Singh & Others vs Bachan Singh & Another 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\/190794","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=190794"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/190794\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=190794"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=190794"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=190794"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}