{"id":204121,"date":"2009-03-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009"},"modified":"2017-04-04T03:22:47","modified_gmt":"2017-04-03T21:52:47","slug":"vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Vidya Devi vs Gurdial Singh And Others on 5 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Vidya Devi vs Gurdial Singh And Others on 5 March, 2009<\/div>\n
Criminal Revision No. 1223 of 1997                                     1\n\n\n\n\n      In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh.\n\n\n                     Criminal Revision No. 1223 of 1997\n\n                         Date of Decision: 5.3.2009\n\n\nVidya Devi\n                                                               ...Petitioner\n                                   Versus\nGurdial Singh and Others\n                                                           ...Respondents\n\n\nCORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.\n\n\nPresent: Mr. Kuldeep Sanwal, Advocate\n         for the Petitioner.\n\n             None for the respondents.\n\n\nKanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral)\n<\/pre>\n
             Present petition has been filed by Vidya Devi against the<\/p>\n
acquittal of Gurdial Singh, Tilak Raj and Wassan Singh, who were tried<\/p>\n
in case FIR No. 124 dated 29.9.1993 registered at Police Station<\/p>\n
Gurdaspur, under Sections 307, 324, 323 read with Section 34 IPC.<\/p>\n
             Mr. Kuldeep Sanwal, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner<\/p>\n
has very fairly stated that the State has opted not to file any appeal<\/p>\n
against the acquittal of the accused\/respondents.<\/p>\n
             Revisional Court has very limited powers in a revision against<\/p>\n
acquittal.\n<\/p>\n
             Briefly stated that Dass Ram stated that on      24.9.1993 at<\/p>\n
about 5.30 P.M. he was returning to his house and when he reached<\/p>\n
near the house of Gian Chand, he heard the cries of “SAVE SAVE”. He
\n Criminal Revision No. 1223 of 1997                                   2<\/span><\/p>\n
reached the house of Gian Chand where he found Gurdial Singh, and<\/p>\n
Wassan Singh armed with dang and Tilak Raj armed with kirch inside<\/p>\n
the haveli of Gian Chand. They were causing injuries to D.C. Alias<\/p>\n
Jagdish and Vidya Devi wife of Gian Chand. Gurdial Singh gave dang<\/p>\n
blow to Prem Lal on various parts of his body. Wassan Singh gave<\/p>\n
several dang blows to D.C. Alias Jagdish. After receiving injuries D.C.<\/p>\n
alias Jagdish had fallen on the ground. Vidya Devi came forward to<\/p>\n
rescue him then Tilak Raj caught hold of her and dragged her and also<\/p>\n
gave a kirch blow in her stomach. Gurdial Singh and Wassan Singh had<\/p>\n
also given dang blows to Vidya Devi. When she fell down on the ground<\/p>\n
then Dass Ram came forward to rescue the injured.         Gurdial Singh<\/p>\n
caught hold of him and Wassan Singh gave him dang blow hitting him<\/p>\n
on the right arm. Another dang blow was given in left thigh and Tilak Raj<\/p>\n
gave kirch blow on his left hand.      The injured were medicolegally<\/p>\n
examined and Medico Legal Reports were prepared.<\/p>\n
          Three injuries were found on the person of Vidya Devi. Out of<\/p>\n
three injuries, two injuries were surgical injuries and third injury was<\/p>\n
kept under observation for operation. The third injury was declared as<\/p>\n
dangerous to life. Injuries No.1 and 2 were blunt but Vidya Devi was not<\/p>\n
radiologically examined, therefore, injury No.3 was declared as simple.<\/p>\n
          The doctors were examined to prove medicolegal evidence<\/p>\n
          Dass Ram, appeared as PW.6, Vidya Devi appeared as PW.7<\/p>\n
and they deposed regarding the manner in which the injuries were<\/p>\n
caused to them.\n<\/p>\n
          Statements of accused were recorded under Section 313<\/p>\n
Cr.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
 Criminal Revision No. 1223 of 1997                                        3<\/span><\/p>\n
          Accused Gurdial Singh pleaded alibi and stated that he was<\/p>\n
present in the office of Punjab State Electricity Board at Ranjit Bagh.<\/p>\n
          Tilak Raj accused stated that he was having relation with Asha<\/p>\n
Rani daughter of Vidya Devi. He met Asha Rani per chance in the street<\/p>\n
and Vidya Devi did not approve the same and Vidya Devi and D.C. alias<\/p>\n
Jagdish gave injuries to him. On this his brother Karnail Chand arrived at<\/p>\n
the spot. He gave push to Vidya Devi and she fell down on a wooden<\/p>\n
peg and received injuries in her stomach.\n<\/p>\n
          Wassan Singh stated that he was falsely implicated in the<\/p>\n
case.\n<\/p>\n
          In defence, DW.1 Karnail Chand was examined by Tilak Raj.<\/p>\n
          D.W.2 Joginder Singh, Junior Engineer, Punjab State<\/p>\n
Electricity Board and DW.3 Vinod Kumar were examined by Gurdial<\/p>\n
Singh to prove his alibi.\n<\/p>\n
          The trial Court took into consideration the fact that the FIR<\/p>\n
was lodged after five days.       Prosecution had failed to furnish any<\/p>\n
explanation regarding the delay. The Court further placed reliance upon<\/p>\n
the testimony of PW.1 Dr. Sukhwinder Singh who stated that injury No.3<\/p>\n
could be suffered by Vidya Devi as a result of falling on broken pieces of<\/p>\n
glass or any other sharp object. The Court further held that PW.4 Dr.<\/p>\n
Rajiv Rampal, who had performed operation, had not stated that the<\/p>\n
injury was dangerous to life. The Court further held that prosecution<\/p>\n
suffers   from    blemish    of    improbabilities,   contradictions      and<\/p>\n
improvements. The Court further took into consideration the fact that<\/p>\n
Prem Lal and DC alias Jagdish were not medicolegally examined. The<\/p>\n
Court further held that two dang blows have been attributed to Gurdial
\n Criminal Revision No. 1223 of 1997                                       4<\/span><\/p>\n
Singh and Wassan Singh. No corresponding injuries have been found<\/p>\n
on the person of Vidya Devi rather injuries No.1 and 2 were surgical<\/p>\n
injuries and   injury No.3 was attributed to Tilak Raj. The Court also<\/p>\n
believed the plea of alibi raised by Gurdial Singh.<\/p>\n
          This Court examined the entire case law in Smt. Sushila<\/p>\n
Kumari v. State of Haryana and Others<\/a> 2008 Criminal Law Journal<\/p>\n
2709 and has held as under:-\n<\/p>\n
                               “It was held in AIR 1968 Supreme Court<\/p>\n
                    707 Mahendra Partap Singh vs. Sarju Singh and<\/a><\/p>\n
                    another, relying upon D.Stephens vs. Nosibolla,<\/p>\n
                    AIR<\/a> 1951 SC 196, as under:<\/p>\n
                                         “Only        two   grounds      are<\/p>\n
                               mentioned by this Court as entitling the<\/p>\n
                               High Court to set aside an acquittal in a<\/p>\n
                               revision and to order a retrial. They are<\/p>\n
                               that there must exist a manifest illegality in<\/p>\n
                               the judgment of the Court of Session<\/p>\n
                               ordering the acquittal or there must be a<\/p>\n
                               gross miscarriage of justice. In explaining<\/p>\n
                               these two propositions, this Court further<\/p>\n
                               states that the High Court is not entitled to<\/p>\n
                               interfere even if a wrong view of law is<\/p>\n
                               taken by the Court of Session or if even<\/p>\n
                               there is mis-appreciation of evidence.<\/p>\n
                               Again, in Logendranath Jha v. Polajlal<\/p>\n
                               Biswas,<\/a> 1951 SCR 676 (AIR 1951 SC
\n Criminal Revision No. 1223 of 1997                                    5<\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                          316), this Court points out that the High<\/p>\n
                          Court is entitled in revision to set aside an<\/p>\n
                          acquittal if there is an error on a point of<\/p>\n
                          law or no appraisal of the evidence at all.<\/p>\n
                          This Court observes that it is not sufficient<\/p>\n
                          to say that the judgment under revision is<\/p>\n
                          “perverse” or “lacking in true correct<\/p>\n
                          perspective”. It is pointed out further that<\/p>\n
                          by ordering a retrial, the dice is loaded<\/p>\n
                          against the accused, because however<\/p>\n
                          much the High Court may caution the<\/p>\n
                          Subordinate Court, it is always difficult to<\/p>\n
                          re-weigh the evidence ignoring the opinion<\/p>\n
                          of      the      High    Court.   Again         in<\/p>\n
                          K.Chinnaswamy Reddy v. State of Andhra<\/p>\n
                          Pradesh, 1963 (3) SCR 412 = (AIR 1962<\/p>\n
                          SC 1788), it is pointed out that an<\/p>\n
                          interference in revision with an order of<\/p>\n
                          acquittal can only take place if there is a<\/p>\n
                          glaring defect of procedure such as that<\/p>\n
                          the Court had no jurisdiction to try the case<\/p>\n
                          or the Court had shut out some material<\/p>\n
                          evidence      which      was   admissible       or<\/p>\n
                          attempted to take into account evidence<\/p>\n
                          which      was     not   admissible   or    had<\/p>\n
                          overlooked some evidence. Although the
\n Criminal Revision No. 1223 of 1997                                   6<\/span><\/p>\n
                          list given by this Court is not exhaustive of<\/p>\n
                          all the circumstances in which the High<\/p>\n
                          Court may interfere with an acquittal in<\/p>\n
                          revision it is obvious that the defect in the<\/p>\n
                          judgment     under      revision   must    be<\/p>\n
                          analogous to those actually indicated by<\/p>\n
                          this Court. As stated not one of these<\/p>\n
                          points which have been laid down by this<\/p>\n
                          Court, was covered in the present case. In<\/p>\n
                          fact on reading the judgment of the High<\/p>\n
                          Court it is apparent to us that the learned<\/p>\n
                          judge has re-weighed the evidence from<\/p>\n
                          his own point of view and reached<\/p>\n
                          inferences   contrary    to   those   of   the<\/p>\n
                          Sessions judge on almost every point. This<\/p>\n
                          we do not conceive to be his duty in<\/p>\n
                          dealing in revision with an acquittal when<\/p>\n
                          Government has not chosen to file an<\/p>\n
                          appeal against it. In other words, the<\/p>\n
                          learned Judge in the High Court has not<\/p>\n
                          attended to the rules laid down by this<\/p>\n
                          Court and has acted in breach of them.”<\/p>\n
                          In Akalu Ahir v. Ramdeo Ram, AIR<\/a> 1973<\/p>\n
                 Supreme Court 2145 (V 60 C 352), Hon’ble apex<\/p>\n
                 Court observed as under:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                     “This Court then proceeded to
\n Criminal Revision No. 1223 of 1997                                   7<\/span><\/p>\n
                          observe that the High Court is certainly<\/p>\n
                          entitled in revision to set aside the order of<\/p>\n
                          acquittal even at the instance of private<\/p>\n
                          parties, though the State may not have<\/p>\n
                          thought    fit   to   appeal,   but   it   was<\/p>\n
                          emphasized that this jurisdiction should be<\/p>\n
                          exercised only in exceptional cases when<\/p>\n
                          “there is some glaring defect in the<\/p>\n
                          procedure or there is a manifest error on a<\/p>\n
                          point of law and consequently there has<\/p>\n
                          been a flagrant miscarriage of justice.” In<\/p>\n
                          face of prohibition in Section 439(4),<\/p>\n
                          Cr.P.C., for the High Court to convert a<\/p>\n
                          finding of acquittal into one of conviction, it<\/p>\n
                          makes all the more incumbent on the High<\/p>\n
                          Court to see that it does not convert the<\/p>\n
                          finding of acquittal into one of conviction<\/p>\n
                          by the indirect method of ordering re-trial.<\/p>\n
                          No doubt, in the opinion of this Court, no<\/p>\n
                          criteria for determining such exceptional<\/p>\n
                          cases which would cover all contingencies<\/p>\n
                          for attracting the High Court’s power of<\/p>\n
                          ordering re-trial can be laid down. This<\/p>\n
                          Court, however, by way of illustration,<\/p>\n
                          indicated the following categories of cases<\/p>\n
                          which would justify the High Court in
\n Criminal Revision No. 1223 of 1997                                      8<\/span><\/p>\n
                          interfering with a finding of acquittal in<\/p>\n
                          revision:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                          (i)         Where the trial Court has no<\/p>\n
                          jurisdiction to try the case, but has still<\/p>\n
                          acquitted the accused;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                          (ii)        Where   the      trial   Court    has\n\n                          wrongly shut out evidence which the\n\n                          prosecution wished to produce;\n\n                          (iii)       Where the appellate Court has\n\n                          wrongly held the evidence which was\n\n                          admitted     by   the    trial   Court   to    be\n\n                          inadmissible;\n\n                          (iv)        Where the material evidence\n\n<\/pre>\n
                          has been over-looked only (either?) by the<\/p>\n
                          trial Court or by the appellate Court; and<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                          (v)         Where the acquittal is based on<\/p>\n
                          the compounding of the offence which is<\/p>\n
                          invalid under the law.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                                      These        categories          were,<\/p>\n
                          however, merely illustrative and it was<\/p>\n
                          clarified that other cases of similar nature<\/p>\n
                          can also be properly held to be of<\/p>\n
                          exceptional nature where the High Court<\/p>\n
                          can justifiably interfere with the order of<\/p>\n
                          acquittal. In Mahendra Pratap Singh,<\/p>\n
                          (1968) 2 SCR 287 = (AIR 1968 SC 707)
\n Criminal Revision No. 1223 of 1997                                      9<\/span><\/p>\n
                              (supra) the position was again reviewed<\/p>\n
                              and the rule laid down in the three earlier<\/p>\n
                              cases reaffirmed. In that case the reading<\/p>\n
                              of the judgment of the High Court made it<\/p>\n
                              plain that it had re-weighed the evidence<\/p>\n
                              from its own point of view and reached<\/p>\n
                              inferences   contrary   to   those   of   the<\/p>\n
                              Sessions Judge on almost every point.<\/p>\n
                              This court pointed out that it was not the<\/p>\n
                              duty of the High Court to do so while<\/p>\n
                              dealing with an acquittal on revision, when<\/p>\n
                              the Government had not chosen to file an<\/p>\n
                              appeal against it. “In other words” said this<\/p>\n
                              Court, “the learned Judge in the High<\/p>\n
                              Court has not attended to the rules laid<\/p>\n
                              down by this Court and has acted in<\/p>\n
                              breach of them.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n
          Similar view was reiterated by Hon’ble apex Court in Bansi<\/p>\n
Lal and others vs. Laxman Singh,<\/a> (1986) 3 Supreme Court Cases<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
444.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
          Again, Hon’ble apex Court, in Ramu alias Ram Kumar and<\/p>\n
others, 1995 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 181, held that it is well<\/p>\n
settled that the revisional jurisdiction conferred on the High Court should<\/p>\n
not be lightly exercised particularly when it has been invoked by a<\/p>\n
private complainant. In Vimal Singh vs. Khuman Singh and<\/a> another,<\/p>\n
(1998) Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 1574 and in Bindeshwari Prasad
\n Criminal Revision No. 1223 of 1997                                        10<\/span><\/p>\n
Singh vs. State of Bihar, 2002 AIR (SC) 2907, the High Court has<\/p>\n
been reminded of its very limited jurisdiction in revision against acquittal.<\/p>\n
           It is well settled that unless any legal infirmity in the procedure<\/p>\n
or in the conduct of trial or patent illegality is pointed out, the revisional<\/p>\n
Court will not interfere.\n<\/p>\n
           I find no merit in the instant revision petition to interfere while<\/p>\n
exercising revisional jurisdiction as learned counsel for petitioner has<\/p>\n
failed to point out any illegality or irregularity.<\/p>\n
           Hence, the present revision petition is dismissed.<\/p>\n
                                                 (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia)
\n                                                                      Judge
\nMarch 5, 2009
\n“DK”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Vidya Devi vs Gurdial Singh And Others on 5 March, 2009 Criminal Revision No. 1223 of 1997 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Revision No. 1223 of 1997 Date of Decision: 5.3.2009 Vidya Devi …Petitioner Versus Gurdial Singh and Others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-204121","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nVidya Devi vs Gurdial Singh And Others on 5 March, 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\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vidya Devi vs Gurdial Singh And Others on 5 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-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=\"2009-03-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-04-03T21:52:47+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\\\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Vidya Devi vs Gurdial Singh And Others on 5 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-03T21:52:47+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1889,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Vidya Devi vs Gurdial Singh And Others on 5 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-03T21:52:47+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vidya Devi vs Gurdial Singh And Others on 5 March, 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":"Vidya Devi vs Gurdial Singh And Others on 5 March, 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\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vidya Devi vs Gurdial Singh And Others on 5 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-04-03T21:52:47+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\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Vidya Devi vs Gurdial Singh And Others on 5 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-03T21:52:47+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009"},"wordCount":1889,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009","name":"Vidya Devi vs Gurdial Singh And Others on 5 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-03T21:52:47+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vidya-devi-vs-gurdial-singh-and-others-on-5-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vidya Devi vs Gurdial Singh And Others on 5 March, 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\/204121","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=204121"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/204121\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=204121"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=204121"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=204121"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}