{"id":220000,"date":"1999-10-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1999-10-28T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999"},"modified":"2017-09-15T23:52:06","modified_gmt":"2017-09-15T18:22:06","slug":"vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999","title":{"rendered":"Vinod Kumar Soin & Another vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) on 29 October, 1999"},"content":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court<\/div>\n
Vinod Kumar Soin & Another vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) on 29 October, 1999<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 2000 IAD Delhi 122, 82 (1999) DLT 527<\/div>\n
Author: K Gupta<\/div>\n
Bench: K Gupta<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
K.S. Gupta, J.<\/p>\n
1.     Petitioner No. 1, Managing Director and petitioner No. 2, Director  of M\/s.  Pushpa Builders Ltd., seek anticipatory bail in case FIR  No.  420\/95 under Sections 420\/406\/120B\/34 IPC PS C.R. Park, registered on the basis of complaint made by Om Gupta.\n<\/p>\n
2.   It  is not in dispute that a public auction was conducted on 7th  May, 1987  for grant of leasehold rights in commercial plot No. 159 situated  at Transport Centre, Rohtak Road, New Delhi and the bid offer of Pushpa Builders  Ltd. being the highest was accepted and thereafter a  perpetual  lease deed was executed on 16th June, 1988 between the President of India as  the lessor and said Pushpa Builders Ltd, as the lessee (Photostat copy at pages 103  to 110 on the police file). The bid given by Pushpa Builders  Ltd.  in respect  of adjoining plot No. 160 on 2nd January, 1987 was  also  accepted and  presumably identical perpetual lease deed was executed in between  the President of India and Pushpa Builders Ltd. Under the perpetual lease  deed construction  to  be  raised could be used only  for  automobile  workshop. Occupancy  certificate in respect of the building constructed on  the  said
\nplots was issued on 19th June, 1990. Thereafter on inspection of the building  being  carried out in October and November, 1990, the DDA  found  that unauthorised development had been made on the said plot in contravention of the  conditions of sanction and in violation of building bye  laws.  Therefore, after issuing notice to the said lessee and providing opportunity  of hearing to its representative, the Director (Building) of DDA directed  the lessee to demolish within 7 days of the receipt of that order the  unauthorised  constructions carried out on the said plots by the order dated  31st December,  1990\/8th January, 1991. Feeling aggrieved, the lessee  filed  an appeal  before  the  Appellate Tribunal. One of the grounds  taken  by  DDA against  the lessee was that the two plots i.e. plots No. 159 and  160  had been  amalgamated and construction thereon raised as if it was made on  one plot. Though this ground was reversed in appeal but the remaining order  of Director (Building), DDA regarding unauthorised constructions was upheld by the  Tribunal by the order dated 27th March, 1991 allowing it 10 days  time to remove it. On failure of the lessee to remove unauthorised constructions the Director (Building), DDA made an order for sealing the building. However,  on making statement by petitioner No.1 before the Director  (Building) DDA on 22nd October, 1992 that needful will be done by him within 30  days, the  period of desealing was extended upto 23rd November, 1992. It is  further not in dispute that said Pushpa Builders Ltd. instead of removing  the unauthorised constructions within the time allowed filed C.W.P. 3447\/93  in this  court  and obtained stay order against demolition.  By  the  judgment dated  29th November, 1994 (photostat copy at Pages 49 to 57 on the  police file)  said  C.W.P. was dismissed and the order of stay of  demolition  was vacated.  In the meantime lease in respect of both the said plots was  cancelled  by the lessor vide order dated 11th August, 1993 on the  ground  of
\nusing\/getting  used  the  building constructed on the said  plots  for  the purposes  other than the workshop for which the plots were given  on  lease (copy of the order at Page 120 on the police file). Details of the unauthorised constructions carried out on the plots have been noticed in the  said judgment dated 29th November, 1994 thus :-\n<\/p>\n
     (1)  27  Nos. cubicals have been constructed  in  basement,  work pertaining to dieting system in progress and plot has been  amalgamated with Plot No. 159. <\/p>\n
     (2)  No natural light and ventilation in basement and blocked  by  partitions.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n     (3) 32 Nos. cubicals have been constructed in G.F. work  pertaining to duet and installation of rolling shutters in progress. <\/p>\n
     (4) Plot amalgamated at G.F. with plot No. 159.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n     (5)  Mezzanine has been extended to a full fledged floor and  has been amalgamated with plot No. 159. <\/p>\n
     (6) 32 cubicals and one toilet has been unauthorisedly constructed. Grinding of floors in progress. <\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
3.   It will not be out of place to state that in said C.W.P. 3447\/93  Shri Parveen Gulati, architect was appointed as Local Commissioner to visit  the building  constructed on said two plots and report if the construction  was as  per sanctioned plans. Para 1 of the judgment dated 29th November,  1994 notices  that  according  to the report of said architect  the  lessee  had violated all the building plans and elevations on all the three floors i.e. basement,  ground floor and Mezzanine floor and that the  building  totally violates the sanctioned drawings as it was constructed against all approved sanctioned plans. Probably the position in regard to unauthorised constructions carried out on both the said plots continues to be the same as it was on the date the judgment dated 29th November, 1994 was delivered.\n<\/p>\n
4.   It  seems  that  the said lessee also filed Suit  No.  784\/94  seeking declaration  that  DDA’s notice dated 22nd March, 1994  asking  for  vacant possession of the said plots and order of cancellation of lease deed  dated 11th  August, 1993 were null and void and that suit ultimately came  to  be dismissed by this court.\n<\/p>\n
5.   Turning to the allegations made in aforesaid FIR No. 420\/95, in  short the case set up by the complainant is that as per the terms and  conditions of  the lease deeds the construction on said plots could be used  only  for automobile workshop still Pushpa Builders Ltd. lessee, inserted  advertisements  in  newspapers including Hindustan Times issue dated  25th  January, 1987 inviting the public at large to apply for offices, shops,  show-rooms, godowns in Pushpa Auto Complex to be constructed on the said plots.  Acting on  said  advertisement the complainant was induced to pay Rs.  1,000\/-  in cash  and he issued a cheque for Rs. 17,900\/- on 25th January, 1987 in  the name of lessee for a shop measuring 163.28 sq. ft in the said complex.  The total  consideration for the built up shop was agreed to be Rs.  1,69,000\/- out  of  which he had already paid Rs. 1,54,100\/- to the lessee.  Not  only that,  the lessee has not removed the unauthorised constructions till  date
\nnor  possession of the built up shop delivered and building has been  again sealed  by  the DDA. A copy of said advertisement  appearing  in  Hindustan Times is placed at Page 172 of the Police file.\n<\/p>\n
6.   Submission  advanced by Sh. K.B. Andley appearing for the  petitioners was that the possession of the shop stands delivered to the complainant  on 5th January, 1991 and in support of the submission he invited my  attention to  the  photostat copy of the handing over letter  allegedly  bearing  the signature  of the complainant filed as Annexure “C” to the  bail  petition. According  to  Sh.  Andley petitioners are even ready to  refund  the  said amount  with  interest at the rate of 12% p.a. to the complainant  and  the petitioners’  having  joined  the investigation in the  past,  no  fruitful purpose  is going to be served by detaining them in jail. Ms.  Mukta  Gupta appearing  for the State while opposing anticipatory bail to the  petitioners,  pointed out that the handing over letter had been ante dated and  the possession  of shop not handed over to the complainant. Be that as it  may, the  fact remains that the shop possession whereof is alleged to have  been
\ndelivered  to  the complainant forms part of the building  the  substantial unauthorised  constructions whereof are yet to be removed and the lease  of the  plots  underneath stand cancelled by the lessor by  order  dated  11th August,  1993 on the ground noticed above and the building is lying  sealed by the DDA. Offer for refund of the amount with interest at this stage  and the petitioners’ having joined investigation during the period their arrest was  stayed by the Additional Sessions Judge, cannot be legitimately  taken as  grounds  for admitting the petitioners to anticipatory  bail  to  which relief  they  are  absolutely not entitled in the said  facts  and  circumstances. Dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Delhi High Court Vinod Kumar Soin & Another vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) on 29 October, 1999 Equivalent citations: 2000 IAD Delhi 122, 82 (1999) DLT 527 Author: K Gupta Bench: K Gupta ORDER K.S. Gupta, J. 1. Petitioner No. 1, Managing Director and petitioner No. 2, Director of M\/s. Pushpa Builders Ltd., seek anticipatory […]<\/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-220000","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-delhi-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nVinod Kumar Soin & Another vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) on 29 October, 1999 - 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\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Vinod Kumar Soin & Another vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) on 29 October, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999\" \/>\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=\"1999-10-28T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-15T18:22:06+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=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Vinod Kumar Soin & Another vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) on 29 October, 1999\",\"datePublished\":\"1999-10-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-15T18:22:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999\"},\"wordCount\":1344,\"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\\\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999\",\"name\":\"Vinod Kumar Soin & Another vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) on 29 October, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1999-10-28T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-15T18:22:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Vinod Kumar Soin & Another vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) on 29 October, 1999\"}]},{\"@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":"Vinod Kumar Soin & Another vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) on 29 October, 1999 - 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\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Vinod Kumar Soin & Another vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) on 29 October, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1999-10-28T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-15T18:22:06+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":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Vinod Kumar Soin & Another vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) on 29 October, 1999","datePublished":"1999-10-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-15T18:22:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999"},"wordCount":1344,"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\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999","name":"Vinod Kumar Soin & Another vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) on 29 October, 1999 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1999-10-28T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-15T18:22:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/vinod-kumar-soin-another-vs-state-n-c-t-of-delhi-on-29-october-1999#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Vinod Kumar Soin & Another vs State (N.C.T. Of Delhi) on 29 October, 1999"}]},{"@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\/220000","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=220000"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220000\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=220000"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=220000"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=220000"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}