{"id":203945,"date":"2009-05-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-05-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009"},"modified":"2016-04-25T05:21:29","modified_gmt":"2016-04-24T23:51:29","slug":"nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009","title":{"rendered":"Nand Kishore Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 15 May, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n
Nand Kishore Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 15 May, 2009<\/div>\n
                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI\n                               L.P.A No. 189    OF 2009\n\n\n                      Nand Kishore Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.\n                                          ------\n\n      CORAM:                               HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE\n                                          HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.K.SINHA\n\n\n      For the Appellant                          Mr.Bhanu Kumar\n\n      For the Respondent-State of Jharkhand         JC to G.P IV\n      For the Respondent-State of Bihar     Mr.P.Kumar, JC to Mr.S.P.Roy\n                                            --------\n\n2\/ 15.5.2009<\/pre>\n
        This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 24.3.2009<\/p>\n
      passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P (S) No.2292\/2002, by which the<\/p>\n
      learned Single Judge had been pleased to dismiss the writ petition upholding the<\/p>\n
      order passed by the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Labour,<\/p>\n
      Employment and Training, Government of Bihar, Patna, by which it was ordered<\/p>\n
      that the petitioner, appellant herein, will not be entitled to receive the salary for the<\/p>\n
      period ranging from 30.10.1999 to 8.12.1999, which was the period during which<\/p>\n
      the appellant claimed to be in custody and it was further ordered that the said<\/p>\n
      period will be treated as break in service and a further punishment of deduction of<\/p>\n
      10% of his pension with cumulative effect has been inflicted.<\/p>\n
      2.            This order was passed after a departmental enquiry was held against<\/p>\n
      the appellant in regard to three charges. The first and foremost charge against the<\/p>\n
      appellant was that the appellant, who had been discharging duties as Inspector of<\/p>\n
      Factories, was alleged to have indulged in accepting a bribe of Rs.23,050\/- and<\/p>\n
      the same was detected, when a raid was conducted in the factory premises. On<\/p>\n
      account of this, a criminal case was lodged against the appellant by the competent<\/p>\n
      authority and a vigilance case was also registered. However, the vigilance case<\/p>\n
      was finally dropped as neither the informant, nor any witness in support of the<\/p>\n
      prosecution version had turned up to support the case of the prosecution. Finally,<\/p>\n
      the vigilance case was dropped against the appellant.\n<\/p>\n
      3.            A departmental proceeding had also been initiated by the<\/p>\n
      respondents in regard to the charge of bribery levelled against the appellant and a
\n                                           2<\/span><\/p>\n
memo of charge was issued to him incorporating three charges. In substance, the<\/p>\n
first and foremost charge levelled against the appellant is that in course of the raid,<\/p>\n
a sum of Rs.23050\/- was found in the drawer of the table on which the appellant<\/p>\n
was discharging duties and the same was inferred to be an amount accepted by<\/p>\n
the appellant as an amount towards bribery. The second charge that was levelled<\/p>\n
against the appellant was of dereliction in discharging his official duty and he<\/p>\n
continued working and drawing his entire salary, in spite of there being an order of<\/p>\n
suspension and the third charge that was levelled against the appellant was that<\/p>\n
after issuance of an order of suspension, although his headquarters was fixed at<\/p>\n
Ranchi, he failed to report at the headquarters so fixed and continued discharging<\/p>\n
duties at Dhanbad, which he was legally not entitled to do.\n<\/p>\n
4.            Admittedly a show cause notice was issued to the appellant and after<\/p>\n
completion of the due legal formalities, the delinquent appellant participated in the<\/p>\n
departmental proceeding and finally he was acquitted of the charge no.1, by which<\/p>\n
he was alleged to have indulged in the offence of accepting an amount of<\/p>\n
Rs.23050\/- by way of bribe. In so far as the second and third charge, which can<\/p>\n
be clubbed together, are concerned, they were found to have been proved, as it<\/p>\n
was held in the departmental enquiry that the appellant, in spite of there being an<\/p>\n
order of suspension, continued to discharge duties at Dhanbad and defied the<\/p>\n
order of reporting duty at Ranchi, even after the order of suspension was issued.<\/p>\n
Consequently, after conclusion of the enquiry, the appellant although was<\/p>\n
acquitted of the charge of acceptance of bribe, punishment was imposed on him<\/p>\n
by holding therein that he will not be entitled to salary for the period from<\/p>\n
30.101999 to 8.12.1999, that is the period in which he was in custody and it was<\/p>\n
further held to be treated as break in service. Over and above, punishment of<\/p>\n
deduction of 10% of his pension with cumulative effect was also inflicted on him.<\/p>\n
5.            The delinquent appellant, feeling aggrieved with the aforesaid order<\/p>\n
of punishment referred to hereinbefore, filed a writ petition before the learned<\/p>\n
Single Judge, who, after hearing the counsel for the parties and on consideration
\n                                          3<\/span><\/p>\n
of the enquiry report as also the order of punishment, was pleased to dismiss the<\/p>\n
writ petition, against which this appeal has been preferred.<\/p>\n
6.           Counsel for the appellant, assailing the order of punishment imposed<\/p>\n
on the appellant as also the order passed by the learned Single Judge, contended<\/p>\n
that the appellant having been acquitted of the charge of taking bribe, the order of<\/p>\n
punishment directing not to pay the salary for the period during which he was in<\/p>\n
custody and to treat the said period as break in service as also deduction of 10%<\/p>\n
of his pension with cumulative effect was extremely arbitrary, unjust and illegal.<\/p>\n
7.    Elaborating this part of his contention, counsel for the appellant, first of all,<\/p>\n
endeavoured to explain that once the appellant had been acquitted of the charge<\/p>\n
of bribery, he was entitled to the entire salary including the period during which he<\/p>\n
was out of service and in this context, he submitted that the appellant had been<\/p>\n
discharged even by the criminal court and therefore, the finding recorded in the<\/p>\n
departmental proceeding on the charge that he willingly discharged duties<\/p>\n
overlooking the order of suspension was not justified.\n<\/p>\n
8.    But on this count, it was difficult to accept the submission of the counsel for<\/p>\n
the appellant, as it could be noticed that the appellant, first of all, had not been<\/p>\n
discharged in the criminal\/vigilance case, but the proceeding had been dropped as<\/p>\n
the informant had not turned up to support the prosecution version, nor any other<\/p>\n
witness had come forward to support the prosecution case. Be that as it may, the<\/p>\n
fact remains that the appellant, in spite of there being an order of suspension, had<\/p>\n
continued to discharge duties on regular basis and over and above, the appellant<\/p>\n
defied the order of suspension and failed to report for duties at the headquarters at<\/p>\n
Ranchi at which he had been directed to report. This charge, in the departmental<\/p>\n
proceeding, has also been proved and hence at this stage, it is not open for the<\/p>\n
appellant to assail the correctness of the finding recorded in the departmental<\/p>\n
proceeding, nor it has been assailed before us and rightly so as it was not open for<\/p>\n
him to assail the same once he participated in the proceeding and was granted full<\/p>\n
opportunity to counter the charges. Hence, during the departmental proceeding,<\/p>\n
the appellant although tried to defend himself, yet he failed to disprove that he
\n                                          4<\/span><\/p>\n
willfully disobeyed by not reporting to the headquarters at Ranchi in spite of there<\/p>\n
being an order of suspension and further drawing full salary for the period was<\/p>\n
clearly not justified.\n<\/p>\n
9.             It is, no doubt, true that a delinquent employee, after having been<\/p>\n
acquitted of the principal charge in regard to his delinquency, may be entitled to<\/p>\n
receive the salary after his reinstatement. But in a catena of decisions on this<\/p>\n
aspect too well known to be quoted, clearly indicate that backwages or arrears of<\/p>\n
salary cannot be claimed as a matter of right under all circumstances. The order<\/p>\n
by which full or part of the salary is directed to be deducted or directed not to be<\/p>\n
paid, will depend upon the circumstance in which the salary was stopped and for<\/p>\n
this purpose, the Courts surely have to see whether there was any justification to<\/p>\n
stop the wages\/salary for the period during which he had been discharging duties.<\/p>\n
10.              In the instant matter, it could not be proved by the appellant that<\/p>\n
he was unable to discharge duties during that period and even after discharge in<\/p>\n
criminal case, he had failed to report for duty at the headquarters at Ranchi during<\/p>\n
the period of his suspension, for which he had no justification either before the<\/p>\n
Enquiry Officer or before this Court. Thus, the appellant failed to offer any valid or<\/p>\n
legal justification. Thus, the order passed by the competent authority replying the<\/p>\n
appellant’s claim for payment of arrear salary for this period is obviously and<\/p>\n
clearly not    tenable. Hence, we reject the contention of the counsel for the<\/p>\n
appellant on this count and affirm the view of the disciplinary authority as also the<\/p>\n
learned Single Judge that he will not be granted salary for this period.<\/p>\n
11.              The next question that needs to be addressed by this Court is in<\/p>\n
regard to the order regarding break in service and consequent deduction of 10% of<\/p>\n
his pension with cumulative effect.\n<\/p>\n
12.            We do not think it appropriate to enter into the question regarding<\/p>\n
break in service as the appellant has already superannuated and is no longer in<\/p>\n
service. Hence, the punishment of break in service is not going to affect the<\/p>\n
appellant in any manner.\n<\/p>\n
                                           5<\/span><\/p>\n
13.           The final question, however, which still remains to be considered, is<\/p>\n
in regard to the order imposing punishment of deduction of 10% of the pension of<\/p>\n
the appellant with cumulative effect.\n<\/p>\n
14.           This order, prima facie, appears to be unjust and was also found to<\/p>\n
be untenable after hearing the counsel for the appellant at some length. The only<\/p>\n
charge that has been proved against the delinquent appellant was that he had<\/p>\n
failed to report for duty at the headquarters fixed at Ranchi for the period from<\/p>\n
30.10.1999 to 8.12.1999 and for this period the appellant has already suffered<\/p>\n
deduction of salary. Except for this period, the appellant has duly discharged his<\/p>\n
duties and therefore, we fail to understand the legal efficacy of the order imposing<\/p>\n
punishment of deduction of 10% of the amount with cumulative effect from the<\/p>\n
pension amount of the appellant. However, the question whether deduction of 10%<\/p>\n
of the pension with cumulative effect is justified or not is concerned, we are of the<\/p>\n
view that when the appellant was away from work for only 38 days, deduction of<\/p>\n
10% of the amount with cumulative effect from the pension of the appellant is<\/p>\n
patently unjustified since the appellant has already been acquitted of the charge of<\/p>\n
bribery and the charge which has been proved is only to the effect that he had<\/p>\n
disobeyed the order of his superior officer by not reporting for duty at his<\/p>\n
headquarters at Ranch and was discharging duties at his place of posting, it is<\/p>\n
difficult to appreciate the reasons for imposition of punishment of deduction of 10%<\/p>\n
with cumulative effect from his pension for once the charge of bribery was<\/p>\n
disproved, then deduction of 10% with cumulative effect from his pension will have<\/p>\n
to be treated as punishment disproportionate to the offence alleged to have been<\/p>\n
committed.\n<\/p>\n
15.           We have to bear in mind that the only charge that has been proved is<\/p>\n
with regard to defiance of the order of the superior officer directing the appellant to<\/p>\n
report for duty at his headquarters at Ranchi during the period of his suspension,<\/p>\n
nevertheless he discharged duties at his place of posting during the period of<\/p>\n
suspension and for this period, punishment has been imposed for not paying the<\/p>\n
salary to the appellant which has already been upheld by us also, as indicated
\n                                           6<\/span><\/p>\n
hereinabove. Over and above, that punishment of deduction of 10% with<\/p>\n
cumulative effect from the pension of the appellant, in spite of the fact that he has<\/p>\n
been acquitted of the charge of bribery is not fit to be sustained.<\/p>\n
16.           We, therefore, quash and set aside the order of punishment passed<\/p>\n
by the Department of Labour, Employment & Training, Government of Bihar, dated<\/p>\n
13.3.2002, by which 10% of the pension with cumulative effect had been deducted<\/p>\n
since this order had been passed without taking into account that the appellant<\/p>\n
has already been acquitted of the charge of bribery and once he has been<\/p>\n
acquitted, major punishment of 10% deduction of pension with cumulative effect<\/p>\n
obviously appears to be disproportionate to the charge proved for the reasons<\/p>\n
indicated hereinbefore.\n<\/p>\n
              Consequently, the appeal is partly allowed but in the circumstance,<\/p>\n
without any order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                          (Gyan Sudha Misra, C.J)<\/p>\n
                                                     (D.K.Sinha,J)
\ndey\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Jharkhand High Court Nand Kishore Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 15 May, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI L.P.A No. 189 OF 2009 Nand Kishore Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors. —— CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE D.K.SINHA For the Appellant Mr.Bhanu Kumar For the Respondent-State of […]<\/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":[8,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-203945","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nNand Kishore Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 15 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Nand Kishore Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 15 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-05-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-04-24T23:51:29+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Nand Kishore Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 15 May, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-24T23:51:29+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1989,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jharkhand High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009\",\"name\":\"Nand Kishore Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 15 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-05-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-24T23:51:29+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Nand Kishore Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 15 May, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Nand Kishore Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 15 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Nand Kishore Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 15 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-05-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-04-24T23:51:29+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Nand Kishore Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 15 May, 2009","datePublished":"2009-05-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-24T23:51:29+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009"},"wordCount":1989,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jharkhand High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009","name":"Nand Kishore Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 15 May, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-05-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-24T23:51:29+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nand-kishore-singh-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-15-may-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Nand Kishore Singh vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors on 15 May, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/203945","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=203945"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/203945\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=203945"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=203945"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=203945"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}