{"id":23021,"date":"1990-08-13T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1990-08-12T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990"},"modified":"2019-02-26T03:05:53","modified_gmt":"2019-02-25T21:35:53","slug":"chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990","title":{"rendered":"Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti &#8230; vs State Of U.P And Ors on 13 August, 1990"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti &#8230; vs State Of U.P And Ors on 13 August, 1990<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1990 AIR 2060, \t\t  1990 SCR  (3) 739<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S Mukharji<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Mukharji, Sabyasachi (Cj)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nCHHETRIYA PARDUSHAN MUKTI SANGHARSH SAMITI\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF U.P AND ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT13\/08\/1990\n\nBENCH:\nMUKHARJI, SABYASACHI (CJ)\nBENCH:\nMUKHARJI, SABYASACHI (CJ)\nSAIKIA, K.N. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1990 AIR 2060\t\t  1990 SCR  (3) 739\n 1990 SCC  (4) 449\t  JT 1990 (3)\t685\n 1990 SCALE  (2)332\n CITATOR INFO :\n RF\t    1991 SC 983\t (2)\n\n\nACT:\n    Constitution of India,  1950: Article  21--Environmental\npollution-Allegations-Scrutiny of--Found to be frivolous--No\ncomplaint from any other person or authority--Held pollution\nlaws not violated.\n    Article   32--Epistolary   jurisdiction--Protection\t  of\nFundamental\tRights--Public\t  interest    and     public\nprotection--Genuine    interest-Misuse\t of--Not    to\t  be\npermitted--Court  to act with great deal  of  circumspection\nand caution.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n    The Petitioner, representing a Social Organisation,\t has\nwritten\t a  letter alleging environment\t pollution  in\tsome\nvillages  and the adjoining Sarnath Temple. The\t letter\t was\ntreated\t as Writ Petition under Article 32 of the  Constitu-\ntion of India. It was alleged that the smoke and dust  emit-\nted from the Chimneys of Respondent No. 3, viz., an oil Mill\nand  a\trefinery plant in the area, and the  effluents\tdis-\ncharged by the plants has been causing serious environmental\npollution in the thickly populated area, leading to epidemic\ndiseases.  It  was further alleged that even the  flora\t was\nbadly  affected by pollution. Petitioner prayed\t for  direc-\ntions to check the pollution.\n    On behalf of Respondent No. 3, it was contended that  it\nhad  complied  with the provisions of  Air  (Prevention\t and\nControl\t of Pollution) Act, 1981 and the  Water\t (Prevention\nand  Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and there was  no\tcom-\nplaint whatsoever. It was further stated that the petitioner\nwas an anti-social element and his only aim was to blackmail\nand  extract  money from people like Respondent No.  3,\t and\nthat a criminal case has already been filed against him, for\nsuch activities.\nDismissing the writ petition,\n    HELD:  1. Article 32 is a great and\t salutary  safeguard\nfor  preservation  of fundamental rights  of  the  citizens.\nEvery citizen has a fundamental right to have the  enjoyment\nof quality of life and living as contemplated by Article  21\nof the Constitution of India. Anything which\n740\nendangers or impairs by conduct of anybody either in  viola-\ntion  or  in derogation of laws, that quality  of  life\t and\nliving\tby  the people is entitled to be taken\trecourse  of\nArticle 32 of the Constitution. But this can only be done by\nany  person  interested genuinely in the protection  of\t the\nsociety\t on behalf of the society or community. This  weapon\nas  a  safeguard must be utilised and invoked by  the  Court\nwith  great  deal of circumspection and\t caution.  Where  it\nappears\t that  this  is only a cloak to\t \"feed\tfat  ancient\ngrudge\"\t and  enemity, this should not only be\trefused\t but\nstrongly discouraged. While it is the duty of this Court  to\nenforce\t fundamental  rights, it is also the  duty  of\tthis\nCourt to ensure that this weapon under Article 32 should not\nbe misused or permitted to be misused creating a  bottleneck\nin the superior Court preventing other genuine violation  of\nfundamental rights being considered by the Court. That would\nbe an act or a conduct which will defeat the very purpose of\npreservation of fundamental rights. [743B-E]\n    Bandhu  Mukti Morchay. Union of lndia &amp; Ors.,  [1984]  2\nSCR 67, referred to.\n    2.1.  This\tpetition is legally devoid of any  merit  or\nprinciples  of public interest and public protection.  There\nwas no fundamental right violation or could be violative  if\nthe allegations of the so-called champions on behalf of\t the\nsociety are scrutinised. [743G]\n    2.2.  Prima\t facie the provisions of the  relevant\tAct,\nnamely,\t the  Air Pollution Control Act have  been  complied\nwith  and there is no conduct which is attributable  to\t re-\nspondent No. 3 herein leading to pollution of air or ecolog-\nical imbalances calling for interference by this Court.\t The\norders\tpassed by the Pollution Control Board also  indicate\nthat there were no instances of any violation. There was  no\ncomplaint  from\t anybody apart from the petitioner,  or\t any\nauthority  as  to the non-compliance of any statute  by\t Re-\nspondent No. 3. [743A-B; 742G]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>ORIGINAL  JURISDICTION:\t Writ Petition (Civil)\tNo.  577  of<br \/>\n1988.\n<\/p>\n<p>(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India).<br \/>\nS.R. Bhat and R. Venkataramani for the Petitioner<br \/>\n    Dr. B.S. Chauhan for the Respondents and Shobha  Dikshit<br \/>\nfor he State of U.P.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">741<\/span><br \/>\n    SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, CJ. A letter written to this  Court<br \/>\nwas  treated  as  a writ petition under Article\t 32  of\t the<br \/>\nConstitution  of  India.  The letter  written  by  Chhetriya<br \/>\nPardushan Mukti Sangharsh Samiti. Sarnath, alleged  environ-<br \/>\nmental\tpollution in the area. It was also  alleged  therein<br \/>\nthat  the  Jhunjhunwala Oil Mills and a refinery  plant\t are<br \/>\nlocated in the green belt area, touching three villages\t and<br \/>\nthe Sarnath temple of international fame. The smoke and dust<br \/>\nemitted\t from  the chimneys of the Mills and  the  effluents<br \/>\ndischarged  from  these plants were alleged  to\t be  causing<br \/>\nenvironmental  pollution in the thickly populated  area\t and<br \/>\nwere  proving a great health hazard. It was  further  stated<br \/>\nthat  the people were finding it difficult to eat and  sleep<br \/>\ndue  to smoke and foul smell and the highly polluted  water.<br \/>\nIt was further alleged that the lands in the area had become<br \/>\nwaste,\taffecting crops and the orchards  damages.  Diseases<br \/>\nlike  TB,  jaundice  and other ailments were  stated  to  be<br \/>\nspreading  in an epidemic form. The growth of  children\t was<br \/>\naffected.  It was further alleged that the schools,  nursing<br \/>\nhomes,\tleprosy\t homes\tand hospitals situated\ton  the\t one<br \/>\nkilometer  long\t belt touching the oil Mills and  the  plant<br \/>\nwere  adversely\t affected. It was stated that  licences\t had<br \/>\nbeen  issued to one richman Dina Nath for  these  industrial<br \/>\nunits  thereby\trisking\t the lives of  thousands  of  people<br \/>\nwithout\t enforcing  any safety measure either  to  cure\t the<br \/>\neffluents  discharged from the plants or to check the  smoke<br \/>\nand the foul smell emitted from the chimneys. The whole area<br \/>\nwas expected to be ruined due to any explosion or gas  leak-<br \/>\nage.\n<\/p>\n<p>    In that background, the petitioner prayed for  necessary<br \/>\ndirections  to\tcheck  the pollution, and  also\t enclosed  a<br \/>\nprinted\t leaflet alleging real-practices and  corruption  on<br \/>\nthe  part of the proprietor of these industrial units  apart<br \/>\nfrom polluting the atmosphere.\n<\/p>\n<p>    As mentioned hereinbefore, the complaint was made by the<br \/>\nsaid  Samiti stated to be a social organisation about  envi-<br \/>\nronmental pollution and ecological imbalance being caused by<br \/>\nthe two plants and thereby exposing the population to health<br \/>\nhazards and life risk which was, therefore, considered to be<br \/>\na  matter  of great public importance. It  is  necessary  to<br \/>\nrecognise  the danger in order to strike a  balance  between<br \/>\nthe quality of life to be preserved and the economic  devel-<br \/>\nopment\tto be encouraged. Dealing with this aspect  in\t<a href=\"\/doc\/1208005\/\">M.C.<br \/>\nMehta  v.  Union of India &amp; Ors.,<\/a> [1988] 1 SCR 279,  it\t has<br \/>\nbeen  stated  that  whenever applications  for\tlicences  to<br \/>\nestablish  new industries are made in future, such  applica-<br \/>\ntions  should be refused unless adequate provision has\tbeen<br \/>\nmade for the treatment of trade effluents flowing out of the<br \/>\nfactories.  So, this letter was treated as a  writ  petition<br \/>\nand notice was issued,<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">742<\/span><br \/>\ncounter\t affidavits was filed on behalf of respondent No.  3<br \/>\nbeing  the proprietor of Jhunjhunwala Oil  Mills.  Reference<br \/>\nwas  made  to the decision of this Court  in  <a href=\"\/doc\/595099\/\">Bandhua  Mukti<br \/>\nMorcha\tv.  Union of India &amp; Ors.,<\/a> [1984] 2 SCR\t 67  wherein<br \/>\nthis Court underlined the importance of satisfactory verifi-<br \/>\ncation of allegations. The Court was asked to be ever  vigi-<br \/>\nlant  against  abuse of its process and there was  need\t for<br \/>\nappropriate verification. There is a statute for controlling<br \/>\npollution.  It\tis wellsettled that if there  is  a  statute<br \/>\nprescribing  a\tjudicial procedure  governing  a  particular<br \/>\ncase,  the court must follow such procedure. It is not\topen<br \/>\nto  the court to by pass the statute and evolve a  different<br \/>\nprocedure  at  variance with it. It is further\tasserted  on<br \/>\nbehalf\tof the respondents that between the petitioner\tSita<br \/>\nRam  Pandey and respondent No. 3, there was a long  rivalry.<br \/>\nAccording  to respondent No. 3, the petitioner is  an  anti-<br \/>\nsocial-element\tand his only aim was to extract\t money\tfrom<br \/>\nthe people like respondent No. 3 as in the present case.<br \/>\n    It has further been stated that there has been  criminal<br \/>\nproceeding  against  the petitioner and several\t items\thave<br \/>\nbeen marked in the affidavit in opposition. The\t particulars<br \/>\nmake out a rather disgraceful state of affairs. It has\tbeen<br \/>\nalleged that Mr. Sita Ram Pandey for the last so many  years<br \/>\nwas blackmailing the people, and a case u\/s 500 of the I.P.C<br \/>\nbeing Case No. 121\/88 was filed. It has been further averred<br \/>\nthat  respondent No. 3 has complied with the  provisions  of<br \/>\nthe Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981\t and<br \/>\nof  the water (Prevention &amp; Control of Pollution) Act,\t1974<br \/>\nand there is no complaint of any kind from any person,\tbody<br \/>\nor  authority. The correspondence, in this  connection,\t has<br \/>\nbeen set out.\n<\/p>\n<p>    It further appears that as early as 1980, the petitioner<br \/>\nhad  made various complaints to the A.D.M. (Supply),  Distt.<br \/>\nVaranasi,  alleging  that respondent No. 3  was\t accused  of<br \/>\nsmuggling of coal and diesel blackmailing. It was dismissed.<br \/>\nIt further appears that there was no complaint from  anybody<br \/>\napart from the present petitioner by any authority as to the<br \/>\nnon-compliance\tof  any\t statute by respondent\tNo.  3.\t The<br \/>\norders passed by the Pollution Control Board which had\tbeen<br \/>\nannexed, also indicate that there are no instance of  viola-<br \/>\ntion of the said Acts.\n<\/p>\n<p>    Time  was sought on behalf of respondents for  filing  a<br \/>\nrejoinder  which, unfortunately, has not been filed, and  no<br \/>\nsatisfactory  explanation has been given therefore.  Certain<br \/>\nletters alleged to have been written on behalf of the  peti-<br \/>\ntioners\t were  sought to be placed before us  in  the  Court<br \/>\ntoday.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">743<\/span><\/p>\n<p>    Having  considered the facts, circumstances,  nature  of<br \/>\nthe allegations and the long history of enemit and  animosi-<br \/>\nty, we are of the opinion that prima facie the provisions of<br \/>\nthe relevant Act, namely, the Air Pollution Control Act have<br \/>\nbeen  complied\twith and there is no conduct  which  is\t at-<br \/>\ntributable  to respondent No. 3 herein leading to  pollution<br \/>\nof air or ecological imbalances calling for interference  by<br \/>\nthis Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>    Article 32 is a great and salutary safeguard for preser-<br \/>\nvation of fundamental rights of the citizens. Every  citizen<br \/>\nhas a fundamental right to have the enjoyment of quality  of<br \/>\nlife and living as contemplated by Article 21 of the Consti-<br \/>\ntution\tof  India. Anything which endangers  or\t impairs  by<br \/>\nconduct\t of anybody either in violation or in derogation  of<br \/>\nlaws,  that  quality  of life and living by  the  people  is<br \/>\nentitled to be taken recourse of Article 32 of the Constitu-<br \/>\ntion.  But  this can only be done by any  person  interested<br \/>\ngenuinely in the protection of the society on behalf of\t the<br \/>\nsociety\t or  community. This weapon as a safeguard  must  be<br \/>\nutilised and invoked by the Court with great deal of circum-<br \/>\nspection  and caution. Where it appears that this is only  a<br \/>\ncloak to &#8220;feed fact ancient grudge&#8221; and enemity, this should<br \/>\nnot  only be refused but strongly discouraged. While  it  is<br \/>\nthe duty of this Court to enforce fundamental rights, it  is<br \/>\nalso the duty of this Court to ensure that this weapon under<br \/>\nArticle 32 should not be misused or permitted to be  misused<br \/>\ncreating a bottleneck in the superior Court preventing other<br \/>\ngenuine violation of fundamental rights being considered  by<br \/>\nthe  Court.  That would be an act or a\tconduct\t which\twill<br \/>\ndefeat\tthe  very  purpose of  preservation  of\t fundamental<br \/>\nrights.\n<\/p>\n<p>    Having regard to the ugly rivalry here, we have no doubt<br \/>\nthat  between the contestants, the Court was misled  and  we<br \/>\nmust,  therefore, proceed with caution. There was no  funda-<br \/>\nmental right violation or could be violative if the  allega-<br \/>\ntions  of the so-called champions on behalf of\tthe  society<br \/>\nare  scrutinised. We must protect the society from  the\t so-<br \/>\ncalled\t&#8216;protectors&#8217;. This application is legally devoid  of<br \/>\nany  merit or principles of public interest and public\tpro-<br \/>\ntection.  This application certainly creates bottlenecks  in<br \/>\ncourts, which is an abuse of process of this Court. We have,<br \/>\ntherefore, no hesitation in dismissing this application with<br \/>\nthe observations made herein.\n<\/p>\n<pre>G.N.\t\t\t\t\t     Petition\tdis-\nmissed.\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">744<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti &#8230; vs State Of U.P And Ors on 13 August, 1990 Equivalent citations: 1990 AIR 2060, 1990 SCR (3) 739 Author: S Mukharji Bench: Mukharji, Sabyasachi (Cj) PETITIONER: CHHETRIYA PARDUSHAN MUKTI SANGHARSH SAMITI Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF U.P AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT13\/08\/1990 BENCH: MUKHARJI, SABYASACHI (CJ) BENCH: [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-23021","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti ... vs State Of U.P And Ors on 13 August, 1990 - 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\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti ... vs State Of U.P And Ors on 13 August, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990\" \/>\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=\"1990-08-12T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-02-25T21:35:53+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=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti &#8230; vs State Of U.P And Ors on 13 August, 1990\",\"datePublished\":\"1990-08-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-25T21:35:53+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990\"},\"wordCount\":1385,\"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\\\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990\",\"name\":\"Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti ... vs State Of U.P And Ors on 13 August, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1990-08-12T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-25T21:35:53+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti &#8230; vs State Of U.P And Ors on 13 August, 1990\"}]},{\"@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":"Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti ... vs State Of U.P And Ors on 13 August, 1990 - 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\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti ... vs State Of U.P And Ors on 13 August, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1990-08-12T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-02-25T21:35:53+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":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti &#8230; vs State Of U.P And Ors on 13 August, 1990","datePublished":"1990-08-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-25T21:35:53+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990"},"wordCount":1385,"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\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990","name":"Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti ... vs State Of U.P And Ors on 13 August, 1990 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1990-08-12T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-25T21:35:53+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/chhetriya-pardushan-mukti-vs-state-of-u-p-and-ors-on-13-august-1990#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti &#8230; vs State Of U.P And Ors on 13 August, 1990"}]},{"@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\/23021","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=23021"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/23021\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=23021"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=23021"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=23021"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}