{"id":20967,"date":"2011-07-22T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-07-21T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011"},"modified":"2018-09-15T19:35:59","modified_gmt":"2018-09-15T14:05:59","slug":"chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011","title":{"rendered":"Chhagan Lal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors. on 22 July, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Delhi High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Chhagan Lal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors. on 22 July, 2011<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Pradeep Nandrajog<\/div>\n<pre>$~15\n*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI\n\n%                                   Date of Decision: July 22, 2011\n\n+                       W.P.(C) 10865\/2009\n\n        CHHAGAN LAL                      ..... Petitioner\n                 Through:     Mr.D.N.Sharma, Advocate\n\n                              versus\n\n        UNION OF INDIA &amp; ORS.            ..... Respondents\n                   Through:   Ms.Barkha Babbar, Advocate with\n                              Mr.Deepak Agarwal, Advocate\n\n        CORAM:\n        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG\n        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR\n\n     1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed\n        to see the judgment?\n     2. To be referred to Reporter or not?\n     3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?\n\nPRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. (Oral)\n<\/pre>\n<p>1.           On 13.7.2011, during arguments, we had deferred<br \/>\nhearing to enable learned counsel for the respondents to obtain<br \/>\ninstructions whether respondents are prepared to recall the<br \/>\norder dismissing petitioner from service and suspend him till<br \/>\ntrial is completed at the Court of Sessions in respect of stated<br \/>\noffences committed by the petitioner.         It was noted that the<br \/>\npetitioner was charged of having indulged in rioting and being a<br \/>\nmember of an unlawful assembly.            Death of a person had<br \/>\noccurred.     Charge sheet filed at the Court of Sessions against<br \/>\nvarious persons, names petitioner as a co-accused.                Offences<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">WP(C) No.10865\/2009                                         Page 1 of 7<\/span><br \/>\n charged of are under Section 147\/ 148\/ 149\/ 337\/ 395\/ 436\/ 452\/<br \/>\n302\/ 429 IPC and Section 3(2)(5) of the Scheduled Castes and<br \/>\nScheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocity) Act 1989.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.           The reason for our tentative view was obvious.<br \/>\nExtreme complex questions of fact and law were arising for<br \/>\nconsideration. The stated offence was not alleged to have been<br \/>\ncommitted by the petitioner in relation to his duties.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.           Learned counsel for the respondents says that she<br \/>\nhas been instructed to inform the Court that the department is<br \/>\nnot prepared to withdraw the order dismissing petitioner from<br \/>\nservice.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.           Charge against the petitioner at the departmental<br \/>\ninquiry reads as under:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>      Report has been received that Force No.834290127-<br \/>\n      H.C.\/G.D. (suspended) Chhagan Lal, C.I.S.F.        Unit-<br \/>\n      B.T.P.S. Badarpur, New Delhi, Case No.8\/2001 has<br \/>\n      been     filed at    local  Police   Station   Narhauli<br \/>\n      Distt.Mathura (U.P.), under section 147, 148, 149, 337,<br \/>\n      395, 436, 452, 302, 429 I.P.C. and 3(2)(5) of SC\/ST<br \/>\n      Act, implicating him in serious criminal case. Head<br \/>\n      Constable\/GD Chhagan Lal, is not only a member of<br \/>\n      disciplined Force, but also a Govt. servant. In the<br \/>\n      capacity of a Govt. servant, it was desired of him not<br \/>\n      to act in a manner, which may not be suitable to a<br \/>\n      Govt. servant.     However, Sh.Chhagan Lal, Head<br \/>\n      Constable has fanted to prove his worth to the<br \/>\n      expectations. Therefore, this charge.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>5.           Suffice would it be to state that as read, the charge<br \/>\nalleged against the petitioner is of his being implicated in a<br \/>\nserious case and since he is a member of a disciplined force, his<br \/>\nbeing implicated in a serious criminal case has resulted in his<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">WP(C) No.10865\/2009                                   Page 2 of 7<\/span><br \/>\n not proving his worth up to the expectations of a Government<br \/>\nservant.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.           We highlight that the charge against the petitioner,<br \/>\nas framed, does not warrant an inquiry into whether petitioner<br \/>\nhas actually committed the offences.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.           List of witnesses annexed with the charge memo<br \/>\nreads as under:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>      &#8220;1. Sh.Ram Prasad S\/o Sh.Kheti Ram Jatav, R\/o Vill.-<br \/>\n      Datiya, P.S.-Harhauli, Distt.Mathura (U.P.).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      2.   Sh.Rajendra S\/o Sh.Dori Lal, R\/o Vill.-Datiya,<br \/>\n      P.S.Narhauli, Distt.Mathura (U.P.).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      3.   Sh.Vijendra S\/o Sh.Pooran, R\/o Vill.-Datiya, P.S.-<br \/>\n      Narhauli, Distt.Mathura (U.P.).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      4.   Sh.Hoti S\/o Sh.Mangi,       R\/o   Vill.-Datiya,   P.S.-<br \/>\n      Narhauli, Distt.Mathura (U.P.)<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      5.    Sh.Jeevan S\/o Sh.Bhoop Singh, R\/o Vill.-Datiya,<br \/>\n      P.S.-Narhauli, Distt.Mathura (U.P.).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      6.    Sh.Rodhan Singh S\/o Sh.Sumeri, R\/o Vill.-Datiya,<br \/>\n      P.S.-Narhauli, Distt.Mathura (U.P.).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      7.   Sh.Hori Lal S\/o Sh.Hoti, R\/o Vill.-Datiya, P.S.-<br \/>\n      Narhauli, Distt.Mathura (U.P.).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      8.   Sh.Suraj Mal S\/o Sh.Mangal Singh, R\/o Vill.-<br \/>\n      Datiya, P.S.-Narhauli, Distt.Mathura (U.P.).\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      9.  Any other witnesses,         who   is   important      in<br \/>\n      Departmental Inquiry.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>8.           The evidence led during the inquiry is as if the<br \/>\npetitioner was on trial and indeed we find that during inquiry<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">WP(C) No.10865\/2009                                    Page 3 of 7<\/span><br \/>\n witnesses have deposed as if at a criminal trial.\n<\/p>\n<p>9.           The conclusion arrived at by the Inquiry Officer reads<br \/>\nas under:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>      &#8220;The said Prosecution Witnesses (PW-1, PW-2, PW-4,<br \/>\n      PW-6, PW-7, CW-1, DW-1, DW-2, DW-3, DW-4, DW-5,<br \/>\n      DW-6 and DW-8), statements and the documents<br \/>\n      furnished by them, evidence, the statements of<br \/>\n      Defence witnesses and after reply going into the<br \/>\n      statement of charged employee, I have received the<br \/>\n      come again, that on 23.01.2001, the charged<br \/>\n      employee at 0700 hrs. the charged employee<br \/>\n      F.No.834290127 H.C.(GD) Chhagan Lal (under<br \/>\n      suspension) went to his village-Datiya, Post-Khamni,<br \/>\n      P.S.-Highway (Narhauli), Distt.Mathura (U.P.) and with<br \/>\n      23 others member duly arrived reached for<br \/>\n      constructing boundary on Panchayat Ghar land and<br \/>\n      despite forbidding Ram Prasad Jatav, Village-Datiya,<br \/>\n      P.S.-Highway (Narhauli) Distt.Mathura, begun firing<br \/>\n      wherein (1) Rajendra S\/o Dori Lal (2) Vijendra S\/o<br \/>\n      Pooran (3) Hoti S\/o Mangi (4) Jeevan S\/o Bhoop Singh<br \/>\n      (5) Rodhan Singh S\/o Sh.Sumeri (6) Surajmal S\/o<br \/>\n      Mangal Singh (7) Hori Lal S\/o Hoti, were injured and<br \/>\n      set fire to their houses and took away their house hold<br \/>\n      articles. In the fire a girl-Guria, aged about 6 months,<br \/>\n      and some goats were burnt.            In regard to this<br \/>\n      happening Head Constable Chhagan Lal (suspended) a<br \/>\n      Crime Case No.8\/2001 dt. 23.1.2001 time 0700 hrs. in<br \/>\n      the morning under Section 147, 148, 149, 337, 395,<br \/>\n      436, 452, 302, 429 I.P.C. and 3(2) 5 of SC\/ST Act was<br \/>\n      registered through FIR.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      Therefore, F.No.8345290127-H.C.\/G.D. (suspended)<br \/>\n      Chhagan Lal, C.I.S.F. Unit-B.T.P.S., Badarpur, as per<br \/>\n      charge Memo. No.V15014\/CISF\/Samudi\/Anu\/Major-<br \/>\n      7\/2007-118 dated 08.08.2007, charged on him &#8211;<br \/>\n      Report has been received. That F.No.834290127 &#8211;<br \/>\n      H.C.\/G.D. (suspended) Chhagan Lal, C.I.S.F. Unit &#8211;<br \/>\n      B.T.P.S., Badarpur, in Crime Case No.8\/2001, the local<br \/>\n      Police Station Narhauli, Distt. Mathura (U.P.), under<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">WP(C) No.10865\/2009                                  Page 4 of 7<\/span><br \/>\n       Section 147, 148, 149, 337, 395, 436, 452, 302, 429<br \/>\n      I.P.C. and 3(2) 5 of SC\/ST Act was registered in a<br \/>\n      serious crime. Head Constable\/G.D. Chhagan Lal, is<br \/>\n      not only a member of disciplined force, but also a<br \/>\n      Govt. servant. Being a Govt. servant, it was expected<br \/>\n      of him no to act in a manner which may be disgraceful<br \/>\n      for a Govt. servant. However, Sh.Chhagan Lal, has<br \/>\n      been unsuccessful in proving himself to these<br \/>\n      expectation.    Which is proved on this basis of<br \/>\n      concequiency of probabilities.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>10.          The conclusion shows that the Inquiry Officer has<br \/>\nopined upon the guilt of the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>11.          It is no doubt true that notwithstanding a criminal<br \/>\ncase pending against the Government servant, it is permissible<br \/>\nto subject him to a disciplinary inquiry, but where complicated<br \/>\nquestions of fact and law arise for consideration and especially<br \/>\nwhere the offence stated to have been committed is a very<br \/>\nserious offence it would always be advisable that the trial takes<br \/>\nplace before the Competent Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>12.          At a criminal trial for the offence of murder, the<br \/>\naccused would be entitled to a lawyer of his choice and if he<br \/>\ncannot engage one, a lawyer has to be provided at State<br \/>\nexpense.      The reason is obvious.       A trial is an adversarial<br \/>\nadjudicatory process and to measure up to be an adversarial<br \/>\ntrial it must be that the standard of the defence meets the<br \/>\nstandard of the prosecution.     For the offence of murder, the<br \/>\ncharge sheet must contain all material on which the prosecution<br \/>\nrelies.   Statements of witnesses recorded during investigation<br \/>\nhave to be supplied to the accused, who gets an opportunity to<br \/>\ncross-examine the witnesses of the prosecution in the context of<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">WP(C) No.10865\/2009                                    Page 5 of 7<\/span><br \/>\n their previous statements.\n<\/p>\n<p>13.          The record of the inquiry shows that the previous<br \/>\nstatements recorded by the police during investigation were not<br \/>\nsupplied to the petitioner. He had no lawyer to defend him at<br \/>\nthe inquiry for the reason the service rules of the respondent do<br \/>\nnot permit lawyer&#8217;s representation at the domestic inquiry.\n<\/p>\n<p>14.          It may be true that the alleged offence stated to have<br \/>\nbeen committed by the petitioner is serious and this may<br \/>\nwarrant the petitioner not to move around in his dress, but this<br \/>\ncan be achieved by suspending the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>15.          For the reason the indictment of the petitioner has<br \/>\nbeen returned on merits by the Inquiry Officer but the charge<br \/>\nsheet, as led, indicts him for being named as an accused; we<br \/>\nhighlight that if the charge is that the petitioner was named as<br \/>\nan accused, that would be no ground to dismiss him from<br \/>\nservice for the reason merely because somebody is named as<br \/>\nan accused would not warrant his dismissal from service. If the<br \/>\ncharge is understood to mean, and as indeed has been so<br \/>\nunderstood, that the indictment was that the petitioner has<br \/>\ncommitted the alleged offences, we hold that an inquiry<br \/>\npertaining to said offences, which are serious offences, could not<br \/>\nbe at a domestic inquiry and had to be at a regular criminal trial.<br \/>\nWe note that the criminal trial is still on.\n<\/p>\n<p>16.          Accordingly   we   set   aside    the   order   dismissing<br \/>\npetitioner from service and direct that petitioner be reinstated in<br \/>\nservice. It would be open to the competent authority to suspend<br \/>\nthe petitioner till the trial before the Court of Sessions is<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">WP(C) No.10865\/2009                                      Page 6 of 7<\/span><br \/>\n completed. We leave it open to the competent authority to pass<br \/>\nnecessary orders in respect of the manner in which the period<br \/>\npost petitioner being dismissed from service till he is reinstated<br \/>\nhas to be reckoned.          We highlight that the respondent had<br \/>\nsuspended the petitioner and when the order levying penalty of<br \/>\ndismissal from service was inflicted petitioner was under<br \/>\nsuspension.\n<\/p>\n<p>17.          Writ     petition   stands   disposed   of   directing     as<br \/>\naforenoted in para 16.\n<\/p>\n<p>18.          No costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                      PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                      SUNIL GAUR, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>JULY 22, 2011<br \/>\nmm<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">WP(C) No.10865\/2009                                       Page 7 of 7<\/span>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Delhi High Court Chhagan Lal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors. on 22 July, 2011 Author: Pradeep Nandrajog $~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: July 22, 2011 + W.P.(C) 10865\/2009 CHHAGAN LAL &#8230;.. Petitioner Through: Mr.D.N.Sharma, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA &amp; ORS. &#8230;.. Respondents Through: [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[14,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-20967","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Chhagan Lal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors. on 22 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chhagan Lal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors. on 22 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-07-21T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-15T14:05:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Chhagan Lal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors. on 22 July, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-07-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-15T14:05:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1573,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Delhi High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011\",\"name\":\"Chhagan Lal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors. on 22 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-07-21T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-15T14:05:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chhagan Lal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors. on 22 July, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Chhagan Lal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors. on 22 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chhagan Lal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors. on 22 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-07-21T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-15T14:05:59+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Chhagan Lal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors. on 22 July, 2011","datePublished":"2011-07-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-15T14:05:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011"},"wordCount":1573,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Delhi High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011","name":"Chhagan Lal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors. on 22 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-07-21T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-15T14:05:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhagan-lal-vs-union-of-india-ors-on-22-july-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chhagan Lal vs Union Of India &amp; Ors. on 22 July, 2011"}]},{"@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\/20967","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=20967"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/20967\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=20967"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=20967"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=20967"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}