{"id":191213,"date":"2001-09-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2001-09-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001"},"modified":"2019-03-20T12:29:09","modified_gmt":"2019-03-20T06:59:09","slug":"state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001","title":{"rendered":"State Of Punjab vs Naib Din on 28 September, 2001"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">State Of Punjab vs Naib Din on 28 September, 2001<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Thomas<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: K.T. Thomas, S.N. Variava<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (crl.) 995  of  2001\n\n\n\nPETITIONER:\nSTATE OF PUNJAB\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nNAIB DIN\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t28\/09\/2001\n\nBENCH:\nK.T. Thomas &amp; S.N. Variava\n\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>THOMAS, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t  Leave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t       The evidence of a policeman was tendered in a criminal<br \/>\ntrial by means of an affidavit but it was not accepted by the High<br \/>\nCourt and consequently the entire prosecution case was thrown<br \/>\nover board. The conviction and sentence passed on an accused<br \/>\nwere resultantly quashed on that ground alone.\tThe State of<br \/>\nPunjab challenges the said verdict of the High Court in this<br \/>\nappeal by special leave.\n<\/p>\n<p>The respondent was charge-sheeted by the police for the offence<br \/>\nunder Section 9 of the Opium Act before the Court of a Judicial<br \/>\nMagistrate of Ist Class, Ludhiana. The substance of the allegation<br \/>\nagainst him was that he was found in possession of 4.5 kg. Of<br \/>\nopium wrapped in glazed papers on 11.10.1984.  The police<br \/>\nversion was this: while some of the police personnel were<br \/>\nreturning after patrol duty they came across the respondent near<br \/>\nthe railway crossing at Kanod village (Sanhewal in Ludhiana<br \/>\ndistrict).  On seeing the police he tried to run away from the<br \/>\nscene and then the police felt suspicious about him and<br \/>\nintercepted him.  When a search was conducted the police could<br \/>\nseize the contraband article (Opium) from him.\tThe police<br \/>\nofficials separated ten grams of Opium as a sample and put it in<br \/>\na matchbox and sealed it.  The sample was forwarded to the<br \/>\nChemical Examiner, who, after testing the same, reported that it<br \/>\nwas opium.  On completion of the investigation the police laid the<br \/>\ncharge sheet against the respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>Prosecution examined Head Constable Dhian Singh as<br \/>\nPW1 and Head Constable Ranji Dass as PW2.  Ex. PD is the<br \/>\nreport of the Chemical Examiner.  Two police personnel (Mr.<br \/>\nSatpal Singh and Mr. Sohan Lal) produced affidavits regarding<br \/>\nthe role-played by them in forwarding the sample to the Chemical<br \/>\nExaminer.  When the respondent was examined under Section<br \/>\n313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (For short the Code) he<br \/>\nrepudiated the allegations made against him and put forward a<br \/>\nversion that the police nurtured vengeance towards him for not<br \/>\nobliging them by becoming a witness in another case.  According<br \/>\nto the respondent the police had falsely concocted the present<br \/>\ncase against him to teach him a lesson.\t He further said that he<br \/>\nwas taken from his house on the early morning of 11.11.1984<br \/>\nand brought to the police station and foisted the case on him.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t  The trial magistrate found that the evidence of prosecution<br \/>\nwas enough to convict him of the offence under Section 9 of the<br \/>\nOpium Act.  Accordingly, he was convicted and sentenced as<br \/>\naforesaid.  The Sessions Court upheld the conviction and<br \/>\nsentence and dismissed the appeal filed by him.\t Respondent<br \/>\nfiled a revision before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana.<br \/>\nLearned Single Judge who disposed of the revision did not think<br \/>\nit necessary to go into the details of the case.  The following is<br \/>\nwhat the learned Single Judge said:\n<\/p>\n<p>There is no need at all to go into the details<br \/>\nof this case in as much as it has been<br \/>\nundisputed during the course of arguments<br \/>\nbefore this court that affidavits of police<br \/>\nofficials, who had handled the opium and<br \/>\ntaken the same to the Chemical Examiner,<br \/>\neven though filed in court, no opportunity<br \/>\nwas given to the petitioner to cross examine<br \/>\nthose, who had filed their affidavits.\tIn other<br \/>\nwords, they were not tendered for cross-\n<\/p>\n<p>examination.  Further, it has remained<br \/>\nundisputed that affidavits of these witnesses<br \/>\nwere not even put to petitioner in his<br \/>\nstatement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.\n<\/p>\n<p>We feel that the view adopted by the learned Single judge<br \/>\nwas too stilted for approval.  At any rate, acquittal of the<br \/>\naccused even without affording an opportunity to the<br \/>\nprosecution to make up the lapse (if it was a lapse) only<br \/>\nresulted in miscarriage of justice.  Presently we may consider<br \/>\nwhether it is necessary for the prosecution, as an indispensable<br \/>\ncourse to examine the police official who played only a formal<br \/>\nrole during investigation.  In this context Section 296 of the<br \/>\nCode can be read:\n<\/p>\n<p>(1)  The evidence of any person whose evidence<br \/>\nis of a formal character may be given by affidavit<br \/>\nand may, subject to all just exceptions, be read<br \/>\nin evidence in any inquiry, trial or other<br \/>\nproceeding under this Code.\n<\/p>\n<p>(2) The Court may, if it thinks fit, and shall,<br \/>\non the application of the prosecution or the<br \/>\naccused, summon and examine any such person<br \/>\nas to the facts contained in his affidavits.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t   The normal mode of giving evidence is by examining the<br \/>\nwitness in Court.  But that course involves, quite often, spending<br \/>\nof time of the witness, the trouble to reach the court and wait till<br \/>\nhe is called by the Court, besides all the strain in answering<br \/>\nquestions and cross-questions in open court.  It also involves<br \/>\ncosts which on many occasions are not small.  Should a person<br \/>\nbe troubled by compelling him to go to the court and depose if<br \/>\nthe evidence which he is to give is purely of a formal nature?\tThe<br \/>\nenabling provision of Section 296 is thus a departure from the<br \/>\nusual mode of giving evidence.\tThe object of providing such an<br \/>\nexception is to help the court to gain the time and cost, besides<br \/>\nrelieving the witness of his troubles, when all that the said<br \/>\nwitness has to say in court relates only to some formal points.\n<\/p>\n<p>What is meant by an evidence of a formal character?  It<br \/>\ndepends upon the facts of the case.  Quite often different steps<br \/>\nadopted by police officers during the investigation might relate<br \/>\nto formalities prescribed by law.  Evidence, if necessary on<br \/>\nthose formalities, should normally be tendered by affidavits and<br \/>\nnot by examining all such policemen in court.\tIf any party to a<br \/>\nlis wishes to examine the deponent of the affidavit it is open to<br \/>\nhim to make an application before the Court that he requires<br \/>\nthe deponent to be examined or cross-examined in Court.\t This<br \/>\nis provided in sub-section (2) of Section 296 of the Code.  When<br \/>\nany such application is made it is the duty of the Court to call<br \/>\nsuch person to the court for the purpose of being examined.\n<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"\/doc\/677948\/\">In Shankaria vs. State of Rajasthan<\/a> (1978) 4 SCC 453<br \/>\nthis Court accepted the evidence tendered on affidavit filed by a<br \/>\npoliceman who had taken specimen finger-prints of the accused<br \/>\nin the case.  The contention advanced in this Court that the<br \/>\nsaid affidavit should not be relied on was repelled by the three-<br \/>\njudge bench in the afore-cited decision.\n<\/p>\n<p>In the present case, the facts stated in the affidavit were<br \/>\npurely of a formal character.  At any rate, even the defence<br \/>\ncould not dispute that aspect because no request or motion was<br \/>\nmade on behalf of the accused to summon the deponents of<br \/>\nthose affidavits to be examined in Court.  In such a situation it<br \/>\nwas quite improper that the High Court used such a premise<br \/>\nfor setting aside the conviction and sentence passed on the<br \/>\nrespondent, that too in revisional proceedings.\n<\/p>\n<p>Added to the above, learned Single Judge observed that<br \/>\nthe contents of the said affidavit were not put to the accused<br \/>\nduring the examination under Section 313 of the Code.<br \/>\nLearned Single judge, on that score also, over-looked the formal<br \/>\nnature of the evidence.\t The substantive evidence relating to the<br \/>\nsample is the result of the chemical examination.  There is no<br \/>\ngrievance for the accused that the trial court did not put that<br \/>\naspect to the accused when he was questioned under Section<br \/>\n313 of the Code.  If so it was too pedantic an insistence that<br \/>\nevery item of evidence, even of a formal nature, should also<br \/>\nform part of the questions under Section 313 of the Code.\n<\/p>\n<p>That apart, respondent failed to show that there was any<br \/>\nfailure of justice on account of the omission to put a question<br \/>\nconcerning such formal evidence when he was examined under<br \/>\nSection 313 of the code.  No objection was raised in the trial<br \/>\ncourt on the ground of such omission.  No ground was taken up<br \/>\nin the appellate court on such ground.\tIf any appellate court or<br \/>\nrevisional court comes across that the trial court had not put<br \/>\nany question to an accused even if it is of a vital nature, such<br \/>\nomission alone should not result in setting aside the conviction<br \/>\nand sentence as an inevitable consequence.  Effort should be<br \/>\nmade to undo or correct the lapse.  If it is not possible to<br \/>\ncorrect it by any means the court should then consider the<br \/>\nimpact of the lapse on the overall aspect of the case.\tAfter<br \/>\nkeeping that particular item of evidence aside, if the remaining<br \/>\nevidence is sufficient to bring home the guilt of the accused, the<br \/>\nlapse does not matter much, and can be sidelined justifiably.<br \/>\nBut if the lapse is so vital as would affect the entire case, the<br \/>\nappellate or revisional court can endeavour to see whether it<br \/>\ncould be rectified.\n<\/p>\n<p>How is it possible to rectify or undo the lapse if it pertains<br \/>\nto a vital piece of evidence?\n<\/p>\n<p> A three-judge bench of this Court has observed in<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/1035123\/\">Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade vs. State of  Maharashtra<\/a> (1973) 2<br \/>\nSCC 793 that such an omission does not ipso facto vitiate the<br \/>\nproceedings unless prejudice was established by the accused  If<br \/>\nthe accused succeeds in showing any prejudice it is open to the<br \/>\nappellate court to call upon the counsel for the accused to show<br \/>\nwhat explanation the accused has got regarding the<br \/>\ncircumstances not put to him.\n<\/p>\n<p>In Basavaraj Patil vs. State of Karnataka (2000) 8 SCC<br \/>\n740 a three-judge bench has followed the aforesaid observation<br \/>\nand stated thus:\n<\/p>\n<p>The above approach shows that some<br \/>\ndilution of the rigour of the provision can be<br \/>\nmade even in the light of a contention raised<br \/>\nby the accused that non-questioning him on<br \/>\na vital circumstance by the trial court has<br \/>\ncaused prejudice to him.  The explanation<br \/>\noffered by the counsel of the accused at the<br \/>\nappellate stage was held to be a sufficient<br \/>\nsubstitute for the answers given by the<br \/>\naccused himself.\n<\/p>\n<p>If such objection was not raised at the appellate stage the<br \/>\nrevisional court should not normally bother about it.  At any<br \/>\nrate, the omission to put the question concerning evidence<br \/>\nwhich is purely of a formal nature, is too insufficient for holding<br \/>\nthat the proceedings were vitiated.  The evidence sought to be<br \/>\nadvanced through the affidavits in this case is, no doubt, only<br \/>\nof a formal nature.\n<\/p>\n<p>For aforesaid reasons we allow this appeal and set aside<br \/>\nthe impugned judgment of the High Court.  We remit the<br \/>\nrevision filed by the respondent before the High Court to be<br \/>\ndisposed of afresh after affording a reasonable opportunity to<br \/>\nboth sides for hearing.\n<\/p>\n<p>The appeal is disposed of accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\tJ<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[ K.T. Thomas ]<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\tJ<br \/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t[ S.N. Variava ]<\/p>\n<p>September 28, 2001.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India State Of Punjab vs Naib Din on 28 September, 2001 Author: Thomas Bench: K.T. Thomas, S.N. Variava CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 995 of 2001 PETITIONER: STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. RESPONDENT: NAIB DIN DATE OF JUDGMENT: 28\/09\/2001 BENCH: K.T. Thomas &amp; S.N. Variava JUDGMENT: THOMAS, J. Leave granted. The evidence of a [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-191213","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>State Of Punjab vs Naib Din on 28 September, 2001 - 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\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of Punjab vs Naib Din on 28 September, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001\" \/>\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=\"2001-09-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-20T06:59:09+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\\\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of Punjab vs Naib Din on 28 September, 2001\",\"datePublished\":\"2001-09-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-20T06:59:09+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001\"},\"wordCount\":1809,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001\",\"name\":\"State Of Punjab vs Naib Din on 28 September, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2001-09-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-20T06:59:09+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of Punjab vs Naib Din on 28 September, 2001\"}]},{\"@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":"State Of Punjab vs Naib Din on 28 September, 2001 - 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\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of Punjab vs Naib Din on 28 September, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2001-09-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-20T06:59:09+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\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of Punjab vs Naib Din on 28 September, 2001","datePublished":"2001-09-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-20T06:59:09+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001"},"wordCount":1809,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001","name":"State Of Punjab vs Naib Din on 28 September, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2001-09-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-20T06:59:09+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-punjab-vs-naib-din-on-28-september-2001#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of Punjab vs Naib Din on 28 September, 2001"}]},{"@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\/191213","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=191213"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/191213\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=191213"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=191213"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=191213"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}