{"id":20357,"date":"1973-02-23T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1973-02-22T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973"},"modified":"2019-03-04T17:25:07","modified_gmt":"2019-03-04T11:55:07","slug":"rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973","title":{"rendered":"Rajendrapaul Ramasaran Dass … vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 February, 1973"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Rajendrapaul Ramasaran Dass … vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 February, 1973<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1973 AIR 1180, \t\t 1973 SCR (3) 543<\/div>\n
Author: I Dua<\/div>\n
Bench: Dua, I.D.<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nRAJENDRAPAUL RAMASARAN DASS SHARMA\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT23\/02\/1973\n\nBENCH:\nDUA, I.D.\nBENCH:\nDUA, I.D.\nALAGIRISWAMI, A.\nVAIDYIALINGAM, C.A.\n\nCITATION:\n 1973 AIR 1180\t\t  1973 SCR  (3) 543\n 1973 SCC  (4)\t31\n CITATOR INFO :\n RF\t    1973 SC1222\t (11)\n\n\nACT:\nWhether\t  High\tCourt  should  give  a\tspeaking  order\t  in\ndismissing an appeal or merely dismiss the appeal in limine.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe  appellant\twas  running a\tOctroi\tClearing  Agency  at\n'Mulund Check-Post' in the State of Maharashtra.  He used to\nattend\tto certain transactions of Montgomery Transport\t Co.\nalso.\tOn December 16, 1968, a truck of the said  transport\ncompany\t arrived  at  the Check-Post with a  machine  to  be\ndelivered  to  M\/s.   Imperial\tTobacco\t Co.  The  appellant\ninformed the Manager of the Transport Company to arrange for\nthe  payment  of  Octroi which amounted\t to  more  than\t Rs.\n8,000\/-.  Accordingly, a sum of Rs. 8,196\/- was handed\tover\nto the appellant in the presence of the Driver of the truck.\nIt  was found out after investigation that the\treceipt\t for\nthe  payment of Octroi held by the Imperial Tobacco Co.\t was\nnot  genuine and on a complaint lodged by the  Company,\t the\nappellant was arrested and committed for trial to the  Court\nof  Sessions, under s. 467, 471 read with s. 467 and s.\t 420\nof I.P.C.\nThe Trial Court convicted the appellant for an offence under\ns. 471 read with s. 467 1. P. C. and for an offence under s.\n420  1. P. C. The appeal to the High Court was dismissed  in\nlimine\twith the word \"dismissed\".  The point raised  before\nthis  Court  was  whether the High Court  was  justified  in\ndismissing  the appeal in limine with one word\t\"dismissed\",\nwithout\t making a speaking order indicating the reasons\t for\ndismissal.   Remanding\tthe  case  to  the  High  Court\t for\nrehearing.\nHELD  : (i) The importance of the opinion of the High  Court\non arguable points requiring consideration in appeal in that\nCourt when questions of fact or law are open to challenge by\nthe appellant was emphasised more than 20 years ago by\tthis\nCourt  in  Mustaq  Hussain v. The State\t of  Bombay,  [1953]\nS.C.R.\t809.   Since then, in a series\tof  decisions,\tthis\nCourt  has  consistently  drawn the attention  of  the\tHigh\nCourts to the desirability of giving an indication of  their\nviews  on the points raised in arguable cases in  accordance\nwith the legal position enunciated by this Court. [552-AB.]\n(ii) In\t K.  K.--Jain v. State of Maharashtra,\tA.I.R.\t1973\nS.C.  243  it was reiterated that reasons  before  the\tHigh\nCourt  for  dismissing the appeal, if recorded, would  be  a\nvaluable  assistance to this Court in finally dismissing  of\nthe  appeal on merits.\tAnother advantage of recording\tsuch\nreasons\t is, that the accused-appellant, who may not  always\nbe  present  in the court, would have  the  satisfaction  of\nknowing\t from  the judgment that  the  points  appropriately\narising for consideration in his case, were actually  argued\nand duly considered by this High Court while dismissing\t his\nappeal.\t  In the prevent case, since the High Court did\t not\nrecord its reasons for dismissing the appeal, this court has\nno  option  but\t to remand the case to the  High  Court\t for\nrehearing  and\tdeciding the appeal  after  considering\t the\npoints\traised and recording its reasons in accordance\twith\nlaw. [552 FG & 553A]\n549\nMustaq Hussain v. State of Bombay, [1953] S.C.R. 809, and K.\nK.  Jain  v.  State of Maharashtra, A.I.R.  1973  S.C.\t243,\nreferred to.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 264  of
\n1972.\n<\/p>\n
Appeal\tby special leave from the judgment and\torder  dated
\nMarch 6, 1972 of the Bombay High Court at Bombay in Cr.\t  A.
\nNo. 164 of 1972.\n<\/p>\n
M.  N. Sharma, for the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
S. B. Wad and Rine Sachthey, for the respondent.
\nThe Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\nDUA,  J.-The appellant in this appeal by special  leave\t was
\ntried  in the court of Session for Greater Bombay at  Bombay
\nfor offences under s. 467, under s. 471 read with s. 467 and
\nunder  S.  420,\t I.P.C. According  to  the  prosecution\t the
\nappellant  was running an octroi clearing agency  under\t the
\nname  and style of “National Octroi Clearing Agency” at\t the
\nMulund\t check-post.\tHe  used  to   attend\tto   certain
\ntransactions  relating\tto the transport companies,  one  of
\nthose companies being the Montgomery Transport Company.\t  On
\nDecember  16, 1962 a truck belonging to the  said  transport
\ncompany\t bearing  no.  MPR 2147 arrived\t at  the  check-post
\ncarrying  a  Depleix  Machine  to  be  delivered  to  Messrs
\nImperial  Tobacco Company.  There were two drivers  and\t one
\ncleaner\t in  the  truck.  On being approached  by  them\t the
\nappellant  telephoned  to manager Bakshi  of  the  Transport
\nCompany to arrange for the payment of octroi which  amounted
\nto more than Rs. 8,000\/-.  The Manager, Bakshi and Director,
\nInderjit  Singh\t went to the Imperial  Tobacco\tCompany\t the
\nfollowing day and after getting Rs. 8,196\/- \/for the  octroi
\nreached\t the Mulund Check-post.\t The amount was handed\tover
\nto  the appellant in the presence of the  driver.   Actually
\nonly  Rs.  81-80\/-  were required for the  octroi  with\t the
\nresult\tthat  Rs.  16\/- were paid back\tto  Messrs  Imperial
\nTobacco\t  Company  by  means  of  a  cheque.\tDuring\t the
\ninvestigation  of  another case arising out  of\t an  alleged
\nforged receipt relating to octroi in respect of some imports
\nby  Messrs Pure Drinks Private.Ltd., it came to\t light\tthat
\nproper\toctroi\thad not been- paid on December 17,  1968  in
\nrespect of the transaction in question in the present  case.
\nThe Assistant Assessor and Collector, Shri Karkhanis,  after
\nsending\t his superintendent Govind Charan to, the office  of
\nMessrs Imperial Tobacco Company he himself also visited\t the
\nCompany’s office and they both felt that the receipt for the
\npayment of octroi held by the said Company was not  genuine.
\nHaving\tfailed to trace the necessary relevant documents  in
\nthe  office  files Shri Karkhanis lodged  the  complaint  in
\nFebruary, 1969 and a case
\n3-L761Sup.  CI\/73
\n550<\/span>
\nwas  registered After preliminary enquiry under\t Ch.   XVIII
\nCr. P.C. the  appellant was committed for trial to the court
\nof  Session.   According to,the trial  court  the  following
\npoints arose for determination :\n<\/p>\n
1.   Whether  it is proved that the receipt, Article A is  a
\nforged document ?\n<\/p>\n
2.   Whether it is proved that it is the accused who  forged
\nthat receipt with intent to commit fraud ?\n<\/p>\n
3.   Whether it is proved that the accused used this receipt
\nas genuine knowing it to be forged ?\n<\/p>\n
4.   Whether  it  is  proved  that  he\tcheated\t the  Bombay
\nMunicipal Corporation, as alleged ?\n<\/p>\n
5.   Whether  it  is  proved that the  accused\tcheated\t the
\nImperial Tobacco Co. of India Ltd., as alleged ?”
\nThe conclusions of the trial court on these points were\t “1.
\n“1.    In the affirmative.\n<\/p>\n
2.   Not proved.\n<\/p>\n
3.   In the affirmative,\n<\/p>\n
4.   In the affirmative.\n<\/p>\n
5.   Not proved.”\n<\/p>\n
The  evidence  in  this\t case  is  mainly,  if\tnot  wholly,
\ncircumstantial\t and  about  20\t witnesses   were   examined
\nincluding  a handwriting expert.  The trial court felt\tthat
\nthe case required evaluation of the evidence of Bakshi (P.W.\n<\/p>\n
4),  Inderjit Singh (P.W. 18) and Handwriting  Expert  (P.W.\n<\/p>\n
17).   Driver  Balwant Singh was not examined in  the  case.
\nThe trial court in a lengthy judgment exhaustively discussed
\nthe evidence of these witnesses.  It did not place  implicit
\nreliance  either  on Bakshi (P.W. 4) or\t on  Inderjit  Singh
\n(P.W.  18) as, indeed in the testimony of ‘both of them\t the
\ntrial  court  found partly reliable  and  partly  unreliable
\nstatements.   The court did not feel inclined to  hold\tthat
\ntheir evidence was wholly unreliable.  On evaluation of\t the
\nevidence of the Handwriting Expert the trial court felt that
\nthe  receipt  in question could not necessarily be  held  to
\nhave been forged by the appellant.  After this’\t observation
\nfollows the following passage in the judgment
\n\t      “I  do not, however, feel that this  earns  an
\n\t      acquittal for him The direct charge  regarding
\n\t      the  forgery could be taken as not  proved  we
\n\t      will have however to weigh the other  evidence
\n\t      for finding out whether he could have used the
\n\t      document\twhich is necessarily a fogged  docu-
\n\t      ment, as a genuine document.  For this purpose
\n\t      we will have to appreciate the evidence of the
\n\t      two witnesses
\n\t       551<\/span>
\n\t      about whom I have spoken quite a long time and
\n\t      we  have\talso to appreciate the\tinterval  of
\n\t      time.   What  exactly the accused\t did  within
\n\t      that  half an hour when he took the money\t and
\n\t      returned,\t  will\t have\tto   be\t   surmised,
\n\t      particularly  in\tthe absence  of\t categorical
\n\t      evidence showing that the disputed receipt  is
\n\t      executed by him.\tThe evidence shows, it is  a
\n\t      forged  receipt.\t It is not prepared  at\t the
\n\t      counter.\tWe may not be sure in finding out as
\n\t      to who wrote it.\tThe accused may-have had his
\n\t      associates  it he himself has not written\t it.
\n\t      Considering  the\tway in\twhich  counters\t are
\n\t      stated  to be working, considering the  amount
\n\t      involved\tand the short time ‘limit  when\t the
\n\t      accused  reappeared legitimate payment  across
\n\t      the  counter will have to be ruled out.\tThat
\n\t      is  not  even  suggested\ton  behalf  of\t the
\n\t      accused.\t He may have his own  collaborators.
\n\t      If we accept the version, which I do, then  it
\n\t      was this receipt which was in the hands of the
\n\t      accused that was given over to the driver\t and
\n\t      from there onwards it reached the firm  Messrs
\n\t      Imperial\tTobacco Co. of India Ltd.   I  feel,
\n\t      the  accused ought to be supposed to be  aware
\n\t      that  the\t real payment was made and  what  he
\n\t      carried could not be the real receipt.  It  is
\n\t      for  this\t reason that I am feeling  that\t the
\n\t      charge of using a forged receipt knowing it to
\n\t      be forged could be brought home to him.”\n<\/p>\n
The  trial  court  thereafter dealt  with  the,\t charges  of
\ncheating and ultimately convicted the appellant for  offence
\nunder ss. 471 read with 467, I.P.C. and for an offence under
\ns.  420, I.P.C. Under the former he was sentenced  to  five,
\nyears’\trigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.\t 500\/-\twith
\nsix  months’  further  rigorous\t imprisonment  in  case\t  of
\ndefault.   Under  s.  420  he  was  sentenced  to   rigorous
\nimprisonment for two years.  The substantive sentences\twere
\ndirected to be concurrent.\n<\/p>\n
The  appeal to the High Court was dismissed in\tlimine\twith
\none word “Dismissed”.\n<\/p>\n
Before\tus  on appeal by special leave the short  point\t but one
\nof  vital importance to the  appellant\trequiring  our
\ndecision  is  whether the High Court was  justified  on\t the
\nfacts  and  circumstances of this  case\t in  unceremoniously
\ndismissing  the appeal in limine with one  word\t “Dismissed”
\nwithout\t making a speaking order indicating the reasons\t for
\nthe  dismissal.\t The facts briefly stated by us and a  close
\nstudy  of  the\tlengthy judgment of the\t trial\tcourt  quite
\nclearly\t show  that the appeal in the High Court  did  raise
\npoints\t which\twere  not  only\t arguable,  but\t were\talso
\nsubstantial   requiring\t  critical  scrutiny   and   serious
\nappraisal and evaluation of the prosecution evidence and the
\ncircumstances of the case.  The impor-\n<\/p>\n
552<\/span><\/p>\n
tance  of the opinion of the High Court on  arguable  points
\nrequiring  consideration  on  appeal  in  that\tcourt\twhen
\nquestions  of  fact  or law are open  to  challenge  by\t the
\nappellant  was\temphasised more than 20 years  ago  by\tthis
\nCourt  in  Mushtak Hussein v. The State\t of  Bombay<\/a>(1)\twhen
\nMahajan J., (as he then was) observed at p. 820 :\n<\/p>\n
\t      “With great respect we are however constrained
\n\t      to observe that it was not right for the\tHigh
\n\t      Court  to have dismissed the appeal  preferred
\n\t      by  the appellant to that court summarily,  as
\n\t      it certainly raised some arguable points which
\n\t      required\tconsideration  though  we  have\t not
\n\t      thought  it fit to deal with all of them.\t  In
\n\t      cases  which  prima facie\t raise\tno  arguable
\n\t      issue  that course is, of\t course,  justified,
\n\t      but  this\t court\twould appreciate  it  if  in
\n\t      arguable\tcases  the summary  rejection  order
\n\t      gives some indication of the views of the High
\n\t      Court  on\t the  points  raised.\tWithout\t the
\n\t      opinion  of the High Court on such  points  in
\n\t      special  leave petitions under article 136  of
\n\t      the  Constitution this Court  sometimes  feels
\n\t      embarrassed  if  it  has to  deal\t with  those
\n\t      matters, without the benefit of that opinion.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Since then in a series of decisions (quite a number of\tthem
\nreported and several unreported) this Court has consistently
\ndrawn  the  attention  of the High  Courts  to\tthe  eminent
\ndesirability  of giving an indication of their views on\t the
\npoints raised in arguable cases in accordance with the legal
\nposition enunciated by this Court.  Such a course is  normal
\nin  cases which raise fairly arguable questions of  fact  or
\nlaw.  In one of the latest decisions of this Court in K.  K.
\nJain  v.  State\t of  Maharashtra(2)  some  of  the   earlier
\ndecisions were again noticed and it was considered necessary
\nto  repeat the emphasis laid on the necessity  of  recording
\nreasons\t by  the High Court for dismissing  appeals  raising
\nquestions which cannot be considered to be unsubstantial  or
\nnot  arguable.\t In that decision it was  reiterated,  inter
\nalia,  that  reasons  prevailing with  the  High  Court\t for
\ndismissing  the\t appeal,  if recorded, would  have  been  of
\nvaluable  assistance to this Court in finally  disposing  of
\nthe  appeal on merits.\tAnother advantage of recording\tsuch
\nreasons. is that the accused-appellant who may not always be
\npresent in court would have the satisfaction of knowing from
\nthe  judgment  that  the points\t appropriately\tarising\t for
\nconsideration  in  his case were actually  argued  and\tonly
\nconsidered  by the High Court while dismissing\this  appeal.
\nThis  would, inter alia, tend to promote confidence  of\t the
\nparties\t concerned in our judicial process. in\tthe  present
\ncase had the High Court recorded its reasons for  dismissing
\nthe  appeal  it would have better  enabled  the\t appellant’s
\nlawyer to consider the advisibility of appealing
\n(1) [1953] S.C.R. 809.\n<\/p>\n
(2) A.I.R. 1973 S.C. 243.\n<\/p>\n
553<\/span><\/p>\n
under  Art.  136 of the Constitution and  after\t filing\t the
\nappeal\twould have afforded valuable assistance both to\t the
\ncounsel\t appearing  in\tthis Court and to us  in  the  final
\ndisposal  of  the appeal without feeling  the  necessity  of
\nremanding  the case to the High Court for  re-hearing.\t The
\nremand\tno doubt must result in further delay in  the  final
\ndisposal  of the appellant’s appeal in the High\t Court,\t and
\nthis  indeed  is  regrettable.\tBut in the  absence  of\t the
\nopinion of the High Court which that Court was under the law
\nexpected  to record we are left guessing about the  line  of
\nreasoning   the\t  High\tCourt  would  have   adopted   after
\nappropriate  scrutiny  of the evidence on the  record.\t The
\nappellant  is  entitled\t to have a proper  decision  on\t the
\npoints\tarising\t in  his appeal by the\tHigh  Court  on\t due
\nappraisal of the evidence in accordance with law.  The legal
\nposition  on the point in question has been  authoritatively
\nsettled\t and  declared by this Court and the same  has\tbeen
\nfrequently reiterated in its decisions.\t The law reports are
\nso  full  of  them  that it appears to\tus  to\tbe  somewhat
\nsurprising  that the counsel appearing in the appeal in\t the
\nHigh  Court  Should have been unaware of it.   It,  however,
\ndoes seem that the attention of the High Court was not drawn
\nto these decisions, for had that Court been apprised of\t the
\nlaw  as\t authoritatively  declared  by\tthis  Court,  it  is
\ninconceivable ,that the present appeal would still have been
\ndismissed  without indicating the reasons in support of\t it.
\nHad  the High Court recorded reasons the delay\tnecessitated
\nby  this  remand  could\t have  been  avoided.\tBut  in\t the
\ncircumstances we have no option but, to allow the appeal and
\nremand’\t the  case  to\tthe High  Court\t for  rehearing\t and
\ndeciding the appeal after considering the points raised\t and
\nrecording its reasons in accordance with law.  We have taken
\ncare  not to express any opinion on the merits of  the\tcase
\neither\tway.   It  is hoped that this appeal  would  now  be
\ndisposed  of  by ,the High Court expeditiously\tand  without
\navoidable delay.\n<\/p>\n
S. C.\t\t\t\t   Appeal allowed.\n554<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Rajendrapaul Ramasaran Dass … vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 February, 1973 Equivalent citations: 1973 AIR 1180, 1973 SCR (3) 543 Author: I Dua Bench: Dua, I.D. PETITIONER: RAJENDRAPAUL RAMASARAN DASS SHARMA Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF MAHARASHTRA DATE OF JUDGMENT23\/02\/1973 BENCH: DUA, I.D. BENCH: DUA, I.D. ALAGIRISWAMI, A. VAIDYIALINGAM, C.A. CITATION: […]<\/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-20357","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nRajendrapaul Ramasaran Dass ... vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 February, 1973 - 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\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rajendrapaul Ramasaran Dass ... vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 February, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973\" \/>\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=\"1973-02-22T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-04T11:55:07+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\\\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Rajendrapaul Ramasaran Dass … vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 February, 1973\",\"datePublished\":\"1973-02-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-04T11:55:07+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973\"},\"wordCount\":2074,\"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\\\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973\",\"name\":\"Rajendrapaul Ramasaran Dass ... vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 February, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1973-02-22T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-04T11:55:07+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Rajendrapaul Ramasaran Dass … vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 February, 1973\"}]},{\"@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":"Rajendrapaul Ramasaran Dass ... vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 February, 1973 - 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\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rajendrapaul Ramasaran Dass ... vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 February, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1973-02-22T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-04T11:55:07+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\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Rajendrapaul Ramasaran Dass … vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 February, 1973","datePublished":"1973-02-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-04T11:55:07+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973"},"wordCount":2074,"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\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973","name":"Rajendrapaul Ramasaran Dass ... vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 February, 1973 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1973-02-22T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-04T11:55:07+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendrapaul-ramasaran-dass-vs-state-of-maharashtra-on-23-february-1973#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Rajendrapaul Ramasaran Dass … vs State Of Maharashtra on 23 February, 1973"}]},{"@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\/20357","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=20357"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20357\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=20357"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=20357"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=20357"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}