{"id":223415,"date":"1971-03-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1971-03-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971"},"modified":"2018-02-15T00:35:53","modified_gmt":"2018-02-14T19:05:53","slug":"makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971","title":{"rendered":"Makhanlal Waza & Ors vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors on 2 March, 1971"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Makhanlal Waza & Ors vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors on 2 March, 1971<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1971 AIR 1106, \t\t 1971 SCR (3) 863<\/div>\n
Author: Shelat<\/div>\n
Bench: Sikri, S.M. (Cj), Mitter, G.K., Hegde, K.S., Grover, A.N., Reddy, P. Jaganmohan<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nMAKESHWAR NATH SRIVASTAVA\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF BIHAR & ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT02\/03\/1971\n\nBENCH:\nSHELAT, J.M.\nBENCH:\nSHELAT, J.M.\nSIKRI, S.M. (CJ)\nVAIDYIALINGAM, C.A.\n\nCITATION:\n 1971 AIR 1106\t\t  1971 SCR  (3) 863\n 1971 SCC  (1) 662\n CITATOR INFO :\n RF\t    1980 SC 326\t (16)\n D\t    1983 SC 990\t (5,13)\n\n\nACT:\nPolice\tAct 5 of 1861 Rules under s. 46 of  Act embodied  in\nBihar  and  Orissa Police Manual  1930-Order  by  Inspector-\nGeneral\t under\ts. 7 of Act-Appellate powers  of  Government\nunder  r.  851(b)-Revisional Powers under  s.  853-Power  of\nSuperintendence under s. 3-Scope of.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nAt the relevant time the appellant was in the service of the\nState of Bihar as officiating Inspector of police.  After  a\ndepartmental  inquiry against him the report of the  enquiry\nofficer\t was  submitted to the Inspector General  of  Police\nwith  the recommendation that the appellant should be  given\nexemplary  punishment.\tUnder s. 7 of the Police  Act,\t1861\nthe Inspector General had power to impose in suitable  cases\npenalty\t  of  dismissal,  suspension  and  reduction. The\nInspector General exonerated the appellant, from the charges\nlaid against him but on the basis of certain adverse remarks\nin  the\t confidential  character roll of  the  appellant  he\npassed\tan order reverting the appellant to the\t substantive\nrank  of sub-inspector of police for a period of  one  year.\nThese  adverse\tremarks\t had  never  been  notified  to\t the\nappellant  nor\twas,any\t opportunity to\t explain  them\tever\noffered to him before the order of reversion was passed.  In\nappeal the State Government set aside the order of reversion\npassed\tby  the\t Inspector General on  the  ground  that  no\nopportunity  had been given to the appellant to explain\t the\nadverse remarks, but the Government instead passed an  order\nof dismissal disagreeing with the findings of the  Inspector\nGeneral and agreeing with the findings given by the  enquiry\nofficer\t by  whom the appellant had been found\tguilty.\t  On\nfurther appeal to the Governor having been dismissed by\t the\nGovernment the appellant filed a writ petition in the High\nCourt.\t The  High  Court  allowed  the\t writ  petition\t but\ndirected  that the appellant's appeal should go back to\t the\ngovernment  for disposal according to law.   The  Government\nthereupon served notices on the appellant to show cause\t why\nhe  should  not be dismissed from service.  The\t notice\t was\nissued\toh the strength of rr. 851(b) and 853 of  the  Bihar\nand  Orissa  Police Manual, 1930.  The\tappellant  thereupon\ngave  his reply.  About a year after the High Court's  order\nquashing the Government's order of dismissal, the Government\nissued\tan order reinstating the appellant but at  the\tsame\ntime  suspending him from service.  This was followed by  an\norder dismissing the appellant from service.  The  appellant\nonce  more  filed  a petition in the High  Court  which\t was\ndismissed  in liming.  By special leave the present  appeal,\nwas  filed.  The question for consideration was, whether  it\nwas competent for the Government, in an appeal filed by\t the\nappellant  against  the\t order of reversion  passed  by\t the\nInspect(*  General  of Police to set aside the\tfindings  of\nthat  officer  by  which he exonerated\tthe  appellant\tfrom\ncharges\t against  him,\twhich  findings\t were  not  appealed\nagainst\t by  the  department,  and then\t pass  an  order  of\ndismissal accepting the findings of the enquiry officer.\nHELD:(1)  The  Act  itself confers  on\tthe  Inspector-\nGeneral\t power\tto impose in suitable cases the\t penalty  of\ndismissal, suspension and reduc\n-L1100Sup.Cl\/71\n864\ntion,subject  to  the provisions of Art.  311  and  the\nrules made under the Act. The  power of\t superintendence\nconferred, on the State Government by s.3\t  must,\ntherefore,  be read in the light of the provisions of  S.  7\nunder  which the legislature has conferred specified  powers\nto  the\t officers  mentioned therein.\tFurther,  an  appeal\nbefore the Government having been provided for under r.\t 851\n(b),  presumably both by the delinquent police\tofficer,  as\nalso the department, if aggrieved by an order passed by\t the\nInspector-General,  there would also be no question  of\t the\nGovernment  exercising its general power of  superintendence\nunder  s.  3 of the Act.  The exercise of such\ta  power  is\nordinarily possible when there is no provision for an appeal\nunless there are other provisions providing for it. [867  D-\n869 A]\n(ii)Under r. 851(b) the only question before the Government\nwas  whether the order of revision- should be  sustained  or\nnot.   There was no other matter by way of an appeal  before\nthe  Government\t by the department or by anyone\t else  being\naggrieved  against  the order of  the  Inspector-General  by\nwhich he held that the charges against the appellant had not\nbeen established.  That being so, the Government could\tpass\nin exercise of its appellate power, under r. 851 (b) such an\norder  as  it'\tthought\t fit in\t the  appeal  filed  by\t the\nappellant  i.e., either upholding the order of reversion  or\nsetting\t it aside.  In the absence of any other appeal,\t the\nGovernment  could not sit in judgment over the\tfindings  of\nthe Inspector General given by him under the power conferred\non him by s. 7 of the Act [868 E-G]\n(iii)The  order\t of the Govertunent could not  also  be\ndefended under r.   853.   Assuming  that under r.  853\t the\nGovernment could suo moto revise the order of the Inspector-\nGeneral, on appeal having been filed before it, it could not\nso  act.  The fact that the power of revision is  conferred\non the authority possessed of appellate power indicates that\nthe power of revision is intended to be used when an  appeal\ncould  not  for\t some  reason  be  filed  and  the  appeuate\nauthority felt that the order was so unjust or\tunreasonable\nthat it should act under its revisional power.\tThat wae not\nthe case of the Government in the present case. [869 D E]\n[whether the order of the Government could be defended under\nr. 853A could not be considered because the existence of the\nrule was not proved.]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CIBVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 23 of 1967.
\nAppeal\tby special leave from the judgment and\torder  dated
\nOctober 9, 1963 of the Patna High Court in M.J.C. No. 824 of
\n1963.\n<\/p>\n
S.   N. Prasad and R. B. Datar, for the appellant.
\nB.   P. Jha, for respondents Nos.  1 and 2.\n<\/p>\n
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\nShelat,\t J,-This  appeal, by special leave, is\tagainst\t the
\njudgment of the High Court of Pitna dismissing in limine the
\nwrit petition Med by the appellant challenging the order  of
\nhis  dismissal\tfrom  service passed by\t the  Government  of
\nBihar.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t    865<\/span><\/p>\n
The  appellant was first appointed as a\t stenographer,\tSub-
\nInspector  of  Police in 1940 in the Police Service  of\t the
\nState.\tAfter the requisite training in the Police  Training
\nCollege\t at Hazaribagh, he was posted as a-Sub-Inspector  in
\n1950  in  Champaran District.  In 1954, he was\tpromoted  to
\nofficiate  as  an Inspector of Police.\tIn  June  1955,\t he
\nworked\tin Saharsa District as an- officiating Inspector  of
\nPolice.\n<\/p>\n
In  July  1955,\t he  received a notice\tto  show  cause\t why
\ndisciplinary proceedings should not be taken against him  in
\na  matter  relatng to certain cloth  recovered-\t at  Katihar
\nPolice Station in a Police Case under ss. 379 and 414 of the
\nPenal  Code.  The appellant submitted his reply denying\t any
\nmisapropriation\t by  him.   On September 26,  1955,  he\t was
\nserved\twith a charge sheet heet  alleging  misappropriation
\nand connivance by him of misappropriation by two  constables
\nnamed  therein . This was followd by an enquiry held by\t the
\nDeputy Superintendent of Railway police\t   at Samastipur.The
\nappellant  alleged that the enquiry was held  at  partially
\nbehind\this back and was, therefore, bad.’ In  April  1956,
\nthe  Deputy Superintendent of Police submitted his  findings
\nto the Superintendent of Railway Police, Samastipur  holding
\nthat the charges against the appellant had been established.
\nThese findings were than submitted to the Inspector  General
\nof Police with a recommendation that the appellant should be
\nawarded\t exemplary  punishment.\t  In  September\t 1957,\t the
\nInspector-General served  a second show cause notice on the
\nappellant to show cause why he should not be dismissed.\t The
\nappellant submitted his reply and also appeared in person.
\nBy his order dated September 30, 1958, the Inspector-General
\nexonerated the appellant from the said charges.\t But on\t the
\nbasis  of  certain  adverse  remarks  in  the\tconfidential
\ncharacter  roll\t of  the  appellant,  he  passed  an   order
\nreverting  the\tappellant to his substantive  rank  of\tSub-
\nInspector  of Police for a period of one year.\t This  order
\nclearly was one of penalty.  Admittedly, there was no charge
\nagainst\t the appellant founded on the said adverse  remarks.
\nThe  adverse  remarks  on the basis of which  the  order  of
\nreversion was passed were, as the said order itself  pointed
\nout,   never  notified\tto  the\t appellant.   Nor   was–any
\nopportunity  to explain those remarks ever afforded  to\t the
\nappellant before the order of reversion was passed.
\nAggrieved  by the said order the appellant filed  an  appeal
\nbefore the Government.\tOn November 7, 1959, the  Government
\nset  aside the order of reversion passed by  the  Inspector-
\nGeneral.  That was the relief prayed for by the appellant in
\nhis said appeal.  The order was set aside on the ground that
\nno  opportunity had been given to the appellant\t to  explain
\nthe said adverse remarks,
\n866<\/span>
\nand  that therefore, it was legally unsustainable.  But\t the
\nGovern-,   ment\t passed\t instead  an  order   of   dismissal
\ndisagreeing  with the findings of the Inspector-General\t and
\nagreeing with the findings given by the enquiry officer,  by
\nwhom the appellant had been found guilty.
\nOn a further appeal to the Governor having been dismissed by
\nthe Government, the. appellant filed a writ petition in\t the
\nHigh Court.  On January 18, 1962, the High Court allowed the
\nwrit  petition\tsetting\t aside\tthe  Government’s  order  of
\ndismissal,  but directed that the appellant’s appeal  should
\ngo  back to the Government for disposal according to  law.’,
\nThe Government thereupon served a notice on the appellant to
\nshow  cause  why he should not be  dismissed  from  service.
\nThat  notice was issued on, the strength of rr. 851 (b)\t and
\n853-A  of  the Bihar & Orissa Manual, 1930.   The  appellant
\nthereupon  gave\t his  reply and\t requested  for\t a  personal
\nhearing.   The\trequest for personal hearing  was  rejected.
\nAbout  a  year\tafter the High Court’s\torder  quashing\t the
\nGovernment’s  order of dismissal, the Government  issued  an
\norder dated March 5, 1963 reinstating the appellant, but  at
\nthe  same  time suspending him from service.  On  June.\t 15,
\n1963,  the  Government\tpassed\tthe  order  dismissing\t the
\nappellant  from\t service.  Hence, the appellant\t filed\tonce
\nmore the present petition which the High Court dismissed  in
\nlimine.\n<\/p>\n
The question is whether it was competent for the Government,
\nin  an appeal filed by the appellant against the said  order
\nof reversion passed by the Inspector-General Police, to\t set
\naside  the findings of that officer by which  he  exonerated
\nthe  appellant\tfrom  the said charges\tagainst\t him,  which
\nfindings  were not appealed against by the  department,\t and
\nthen  pass an order of dismissal accepting the\tfindings  of
\nthe enquiry officer.\n<\/p>\n
The  appellant\twas governed by the Police Act, 5  of  1861.
\nSec. 2 of the Act deals with the constitution of the  police
\nforce  and  provides that the  entire  police  establishment
\nunder a State Government shall, for the purposes of the Act,
\nbe  deemed to be one police force, and shall be\t constituted
\nis  such manner as shall from the to time be ordered by\t the
\nState Government.  Sec. 3 provides that “The superintendence
\nof  the\t police throughout a general police  district  shall
\nvest  in and, shall be exercised by the State Government  to
\nwhich  such  district  is  subordinate.”  Under\t s.  4,\t the
\nadmistration  of  the  police throughout  a  general  police
\ndistrict  is vested in the Inspector-General of Police,\t and
\nin  such Deputy Inspectors-General of Police  and  Assistant
\nInspectorsGeneral  as the State Government shall  deem\tfit.
\nSec. 7 runs as follows
\n\t      “Subject to the provisions of article 3 1 1 of
\n\t      the  Constitution,  and to such rules  as\t the
\n\t      State Government may
\n\t      867<\/span>
\n\t      from  time  to time make under this  Act,\t the
\n\t      InspectorGeneral,\t Deputy\t Inspectors-General,
\n\t      Assistant\t  inspectors-General  and   District
\n\t      Superintendents  of  Police may  at  any\ttime
\n\t      dismiss, suspend or reduce any police  officer
\n\t      of  the  sub-ordinate ranks  whom\t they  shall
\n\t      think remiss or negligent in the discharge  of
\n\t      his duty, or unfit for the same, or may  award
\n\t      any one or more of the following\tpunishments-
\n\t      to any police officer of the subordinate\trank
\n\t      who shall discharge his duty in a careless  or
\n\t      negligent manner, or who by any act of his own
\n\t      shall  render himself unfit for the  discharge
\n\t      thereof, namely.”\n<\/p>\n
The  section  then sets out the punishments which  the\tsaid
\nofficers can impose, namely, fine, confinement to  quarters,
\ndeprivation of good-conduct pay and removal from any  office
\nof distinction or special emolument.\n<\/p>\n
It  is clear that the Act itself confers on  the  Inspector-
\nGeneral\t power\tto impose in suitable cases the\t penalty  of
\ndismissal,  suspension and reduction, subject of course,  to
\nthe provisions of Art. 311 and the rules made under the Act.
\nThe   power  of\t superintendence  conferred  on\t the   State
\nGovernment by S. 3 must, therefore, be read in the light  of
\nthe  provisions\t of S., 7 under which  the  Legislature\t has
\nconferred specific powers to the officers mentioned therein.
\nTherefore, the State Government cannot interfere with, under
\nthe    purported   exercise   of  the\tgeneral\t  power\t  of
\nsuperintendence under s. 3  with an order passed by any\t one
\nof the officers mentioned in S.\t   7  in  exercise  of\t the
\npower  conferred  on them by that section, unless  there  is
\nsome   provision   which  authorises   or   envisages\tsuch
\ninterference.  Under S. 46(2), the State Government has been
\ngiven  the  power  to  make  rules  from  time\tto  time  by
\nnotification  in  the official gazette consistent  with\t the
\nAct, Inter alia :\n<\/p>\n
\t      “(a) to regulate the procedure to be  followed
\n\t      by  Magistrates  and  police-officers  in\t the
\n\t      discharge of any duty imposed-upon them by  or
\n\t      under this Act;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (c)generally,  for  giving  effect  to  the
\n\t      provisions of this Act.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
It  would  seem that in pursuance of the rule  making  power
\nunder  S. 46 (2) rules have been made which are to be  found
\nin the Bihar & Orissa Police Manual, 1930.  The Manual\thas
\nnot been produced before us.  But we find r. 851 set out  by
\nthe High Court
\n868<\/span>
\nin  its\t judgment in the first writ, petition filed  by\t the
\nappellant,  reported in Makeshwar Nath vs.   Bihar(1).\t The
\nrule so set out reads ‘as follows :\n<\/p>\n
\t      “General rules as to appeals\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (a)…………\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (b)   Against an order of, dismissal,  removal
\n\t      reduction,  withholding of promotion or  peri-
\n\t      odical  increment……  there  shall  be\t one
\n\t      appeal in each case as follows;
\n\t      Against  an order passed by a  Superintendent,
\n\t      to the Deputy Inspector_General;
\n\t      Against  an original order passed by a  Deputy
\n\t      Inspector General, to the Inspector General;
\n\t      Against\tan  original(order  passed  by\t the
\n\t      Inspector-General, to the Local Government.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\t      (c)   The order of the appellate authority  on
\n\t      any such appeal shall be final.”\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Under  this rule an appeal would lie before  the  Government
\nagainst\t the  order of the Inspector-General  reverting\t the
\nappellant  to his substantive post of Sub-Inspector for\t one
\nyear.\tSuch an appeal was in fact filed by  the  appellant.
\nBut no appeal was filed by the department against the  order
\nof  the Inspector-General exonerating the appellant  of\t the
\ncharges\t   of\t misappropriation    and    connivance\t  of
\nmisappropriation  by the two constables.  Under r. 851\t(b),
\ntherefore,  the\t only  question before\tthe  Government\t was
\nwhether\t the order of reversion should be sustained or\tnot.
\nThere  was  no other matter by way of an appeal\t before\t the
\nGovernment  by\tthe  department or by  any  one\t else  being
\naggrieved  against  the order of  the  Inspector-General  by
\nwhich  he held that the charges. against the  appellant\t had
\nnot  been established.\tThat being so, the Government  could
\npass  in  exercise of its appellate power under r.  851\t (b)
\nsuch  an order as it thought fit in the appeal filed by\t the
\nappellant,  i.e. either upholding the order of reversion  or
\nsetting it aside.  In the absence, of any other appeal,\t the
\nGovernment  could not sit in judgment over the\tfindings  of
\nthe Inspector-General given by him under the power conferred
\nupon  him  by  S.  7  of the  Act.   An\t appeal\t before\t the
\nGovernment  having  been  provided for\tunder  r.  851\t(b),
\npresumably both by the delinquent police officer, as also by
\nthe  department,  if  aggrieved by an order  passed  by\t the
\nInspector-General,  there would also be no question  of\t the
\nGovernment exercising, its general power of  superintendence
\nunder S. 3 of the Act.\tThe
\n(1)  A.I.R. 1962 Pat. 276.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t    869<\/span><\/p>\n
exercise  of such a power is ordinarily possible when  there
\nis  no\tprovision  for\tan appear  unless  there  are  other
\nprovisions providing for it.  The order of dismissal  passed
\nby  the\t Government  in the appeal filed  by  the  appellant
\ntherefore, was not sustainable.\n<\/p>\n
We are, however, informed by counsel that the Government  of
\nBihar has framed two rules, r. 853 and r. 853-A.  Rule\t853,
\na copy, of which has been furnished to us, provides
\n\t      “Memorials   and\tRevision.-No   petition\t  or
\n\t      memorial which is a representation against  an
\n\t      order  passed in a disciplinary case shall  be
\n\t\t\t    submitted  to  any\tauthority  other
\nthan  the authority  which under the rule for the  time
\n\t      being in force is empowered to enter   am\t the
\n\t      appeal.\n<\/p>\n
No memorial or revision was filed either by the appellant or
\nany\t  one  else  before the Government,  which  was\t the
\nappellate authority\t which\t could-entertain   such\t   a
\nmemorial  or  revision.\t Assuming  that\t under\tr.  853\t the
\nGovernment could suo moto revise the order of the Inspector-
\nGeneral, an appeal having been filed before I it,      it
\ncould not so act. The fact that the power of revision is con
\nfeared\ton  the\t authority  possessed  of  appellate   power
\nindicates that\t    the power of revision is intended to  be
\nused when an appeal  could    not  for some reason be  filed
\nand the appellate authority felt that\t     the  order\t was
\nso  unjust  or\tunreasonable that it  shold  act  under\t its
\nrevisional  power. That was not the case of  the  Government
\nbefore\t  us. Nor did the Government say so in the  impugned
\norder.\t  Therefore,   there   was  no\toccasion   for\t the
\nGovernment to revise the order\tpassed\tby  the\t  Inspector-
\nGeneral exonerating the appellant\tof    the    charges
\npreferred against him.\n<\/p>\n
In  its\t order, dated January 31, 1963, the  Government,  no
\ndoubt,\thas referred to rr. 8 5 1 (b) and 8 5 3 A as  being
\nthe rules      under  which  it\t purported to  act  for\t the
\npurpose of making the impugned order of dismissal. Rule\t 851\n<\/p>\n
(b), as already pointed out,  however,\t confers   no\tsuch
\npower.\tAs  regards r. 853-A, it is neither set out  in\t the
\nimpugned  order,  nor  in  the\tstatement  of  case  of\t the
\nrespondent-State. We called for its production, or even\t its
\ncopy\t  but counsel for the State expressed his  inability
\nto produce the\t    same. Further, counsel for the appellant
\ntold  us  that even if r.853 A had been framed,\t it  cannot
\noperate because so far it has, not\tbeen  published\t  in
\nthe  official gazette as required by S. 46(2).\tCounsel\t for
\nthe State was not in a position to throw any light     whether
\nthe said rule has been framed or not and if framed     whether
\nit was notified in the Gazette. In these circumstance  he
\ncould  not  rely  upon that rule to  sustain  the  order  of
\ndismissal      passed by the Government. We have, therefore,
\nto go upon r.\t    851 (b), which clearly does not  empower
\nthe Government to pass\t an  order such as the one  impugned
\nby the appellant on the ground
\n870<\/span>
\nof its revisional power or any such similar power under s. 3
\nof the Act.  In the absence of any other provision of law or
\nany  rule conferring on the- State Government the, power  to
\npass  an  order of dismissal in exercise of  its  revisional
\npower  or  power  of general  superintendence,\tthe  general
\nprinciple must prevail, namely, that an appellate  authority
\nin  an appeal by an aggrieved party may either\tdismiss\t his
\nappeal or allow it either wholly or partly and uphold or set
\naside  or  modify the order challenged in such\tappeal.\t  It
\ncannot\tsurely impose on such an appellant a higher  penalty
\nand condemn him to a position worse than the one he would be
\nin if he had not hazarded to file an appeal.  Since under r.
\n851  (b) an appeal to the Government has been  provided\t for
\nand  the  Government  had  under  that\trule  the  appellate
\nauthority to dispose of appeals filed before it against\t the
\noriginal  order passed by the Ins-pector-General,  it  could
\nnot resort to any general power of superintendence except in
\ncases where there is a provision conferring such a power  in
\naddition  to  its  appellate authority\tand  in\t the  manner
\nenvisaged by such a provision.\n<\/p>\n
In our view, the High Court was not right in dismissing\t the
\nappellant’s writ petition.  The appeal has, therefore, to be
\nallowed\t and  the order of the State Government\t quashed  as
\nbeing  without jurisdiction.  The consequence is as  if\t the
\nappellant  was never dismissed, and continued to  remain  in
\nthe, police force to which he was attached.  The respondent-
\nState  will  pay  to the appellant the costs  both  of\tthis
\nappeal\tand  also of the writ petition filed by him  in\t the
\nHigh Court.\n<\/p>\n
G.C.\n<\/p>\n
Appeal allowed.\n<\/p>\n
871<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Makhanlal Waza & Ors vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors on 2 March, 1971 Equivalent citations: 1971 AIR 1106, 1971 SCR (3) 863 Author: Shelat Bench: Sikri, S.M. (Cj), Mitter, G.K., Hegde, K.S., Grover, A.N., Reddy, P. Jaganmohan PETITIONER: MAKESHWAR NATH SRIVASTAVA Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-223415","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nMakhanlal Waza & Ors vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors on 2 March, 1971 - 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\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Makhanlal Waza & Ors vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors on 2 March, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971\" \/>\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=\"1971-03-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-02-14T19:05:53+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=\"17 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Makhanlal Waza & Ors vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors on 2 March, 1971\",\"datePublished\":\"1971-03-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-14T19:05:53+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971\"},\"wordCount\":2555,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971\",\"name\":\"Makhanlal Waza & Ors vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors on 2 March, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1971-03-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-02-14T19:05:53+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Makhanlal Waza & Ors vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors on 2 March, 1971\"}]},{\"@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":"Makhanlal Waza & Ors vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors on 2 March, 1971 - 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\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Makhanlal Waza & Ors vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors on 2 March, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1971-03-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-02-14T19:05:53+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":"17 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Makhanlal Waza & Ors vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors on 2 March, 1971","datePublished":"1971-03-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-14T19:05:53+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971"},"wordCount":2555,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971","name":"Makhanlal Waza & Ors vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors on 2 March, 1971 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1971-03-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-02-14T19:05:53+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/makhanlal-waza-ors-vs-state-of-jammu-kashmir-ors-on-2-march-1971#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Makhanlal Waza & Ors vs State Of Jammu & Kashmir & Ors on 2 March, 1971"}]},{"@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\/223415","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=223415"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/223415\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=223415"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=223415"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=223415"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}