{"id":233905,"date":"2009-11-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009"},"modified":"2017-10-09T11:22:06","modified_gmt":"2017-10-09T05:52:06","slug":"inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"Inder And Another vs The State Of Haryana on 28 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Inder And Another vs The State Of Haryana on 28 November, 2009<\/div>\n
Crl. Appeals No. 113 & 124-DB of 2001                                        [ 1   ]\n\n IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH\n\n\n                                                Crl. Appeal No. 113-DB of 2001\n                                                Date of Decision: Nov.28,2009\n\n\n\nInder and another.................................................... Appellants\n\n                                  Versus\n\nThe State of Haryana............................................ Respondent\n\n                                  And\n                                                Crl. Appeal No.124-DB of 2001\n\nRajinder @ Raj Singh ........................................... Appellant\n\n                                Versus\n\nState of Haryana .................................................... Respondent\n\n\n\nCoram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Ashutosh Mohunta\n       Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jitendra Chauhan\n\n\nPresent:       Mr. Vinod Ghai, Advocate with\n               Mr. B.S.Saroha, Advocate\n               and Mr. Sunny Saggar, Advocate\n                for the appellants.\n\n               Mr. S.S.Goripuria, DAG, Haryana assisted by\n               Mr. Ajay Pal Singh, Gill, Advocate for\n               Mr. Bijender Dhankar, Advocate\n\n                                               ...\n\nASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.\n<\/pre>\n
                Appellants Inder son of Raghubir and Mukesh Kumar son of<\/p>\n
Ram Kishan have filed Criminal Appeal No. 113-DB of 2001 and appellant<\/p>\n
Rajinder @ Raj Singh has filed Criminal Appeal No. 124-DB of 2001<\/p>\n
challenging the judgments of conviction dated 6.2.2001and the order of<\/p>\n
sentence dated 9.2.2001 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat,
\n Crl. Appeals No. 113 & 124-DB of 2001                        [ 2    ]<\/p>\n
vide which they have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section<\/p>\n
34 IPC and have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a<\/p>\n
fine of Rs.10,000\/- each and in default of payment of fine, to further<\/p>\n
undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.\n<\/p>\n
            The instant case was registered on the statement made by the<\/p>\n
complainant Ranjit Singh son of Siri Chand to the police. In his statement<\/p>\n
(Ex.PB\/2), he stated that he was employed as a Gangman with Gang No.12<\/p>\n
of Railway Department and he has been working as a Gateman at Gate<\/p>\n
No.39-C existing between Railway Station Bhodwal Majari and Ganaur. It<\/p>\n
was further stated by him that on 23.7.1999 he had reported for his duty at<\/p>\n
about 8:00A.M. which was upto 8:00 P.M. His brother Siri Ram came to<\/p>\n
meet him. Siri Ram was in custody for the last one year in a case pertaining<\/p>\n
to the murder of Zile Singh son of Chandgi Ram resident of their village and<\/p>\n
had been released on bail. Siri Ram had first visited his brother at his house<\/p>\n
along with his friend from Sonepat but there he came to know that his<\/p>\n
brother Ranjit Singh was on duty at the Railway Gate and so Siri Ram came<\/p>\n
to the Railway Gate No.39-C on the railway line along with his friend<\/p>\n
Pawan Kumar on a scooter. On reaching the Gate at 5 P.M. on 23.7.1999,<\/p>\n
Siri Ram told the complainant Ranjit Singh that police was investigating the<\/p>\n
case regarding abduction of his daughter Sushma by Raj Singh son of Zile<\/p>\n
Singh, Mukesh son of Ram Kishan, and Karambir son of Lakhmi Chand on<\/p>\n
an application moved by him. In the meantime, Raj Singh and Krishan sons<\/p>\n
of Zile Singh, Mukesh son of Ram Kishan and Inder son of Raghbir resident<\/p>\n
of village Jhanjhara were seen coming from the railway track from the<\/p>\n
village side. The complainant asked his brother Siri Ram and his companion<\/p>\n
to run away from there. As soon as they started their scooter in order to run
\n Crl. Appeals No. 113 & 124-DB of 2001                        [ 3   ]<\/p>\n
away, all the aforementioned four persons reached there. Raj Singh son of<\/p>\n
Zile Singh was armed with an axe whereas all the other persons were<\/p>\n
unarmed. In the meantime, Mukesh and Inder caught hold of Siri Ram and<\/p>\n
pushed Pawan Kumar, who was on the driving seat of the scooter.<\/p>\n
Resultantly, the scooter fell down and at once Raj Singh inflicted 2-3 axe<\/p>\n
blows on the neck of Siri Ram as a result of which Siri Ram died at the spot.<\/p>\n
All the accused persons fled away and while going, they threatened the<\/p>\n
complainant that in case, he would depose against them then he would also<\/p>\n
be killed. The statement was made by the complainant Ranjit (PW-17),<\/p>\n
brother of the deceased at 8:05 P.M. which was recorded by ASI Mehtab<\/p>\n
Singh (PW-13). On the basis of the aforementioned statement, formal FIR<\/p>\n
(Ex.PB\/2) was recorded at Police Station GRP Sonepat.<\/p>\n
             ASI Mehtab Singh prepared the rough site plan of the place of<\/p>\n
occurrence. The scooter was taken into custody by him vide Memo Ex.PL<\/p>\n
which was duly attested by the witnesses. Thereafter, information was sent<\/p>\n
to Daya Nand SI\/SHO G.R.P. Sonepat who also reached the place of<\/p>\n
occurrence. Inquest Report (Ex.PJ) was prepared. The blood stained earth<\/p>\n
and grass was taken into possession vide memo and after preparing their<\/p>\n
parcel it were sealed with seal DNS. Photographs of the dead body were<\/p>\n
also taken. The dead body was sent for post-mortem examination along with<\/p>\n
the request Ex.PN\/1.\n<\/p>\n
             Doctor Adarsh Sharma, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital,<\/p>\n
Sonepat (PW-16) conducted the post-mortem on the dead body of the<\/p>\n
deceased on 24.7.1999 and found the following injuries on the person of the<\/p>\n
deceased:-\n<\/p>\n
             “1. Incised wound on left side of face and head 18 x 2 cms in
\n Crl. Appeals No. 113 & 124-DB of 2001                        [ 4   ]<\/p>\n
            size. beginning from left cheek going superiorly and<\/p>\n
            longitudely in front of the left ear upto left parietal area of<\/p>\n
            scalp. Clotted blood was present. Wound was bone deep<\/p>\n
            underlying bones of scalp and left maxillary and left mandible<\/p>\n
            bone fractured.\n<\/p>\n
            2. Incised wound on right side of fact at right remus of<\/p>\n
            mandible 10 x 3 cms in size transversely placed starting from<\/p>\n
            midline in chin going laterally towards right cheek and going<\/p>\n
            upto in front of right ear. Wound was bone deep and clotted<\/p>\n
            blood was present. Underlying mandible bone fractured.<\/p>\n
            3. Incised wound 8 x 4 cms in size on right side of neck<\/p>\n
            horyzontly placed. Semi-clotted blood was there. Wound was in<\/p>\n
            continuation of injury No.2. Underlying neck muscles carotid<\/p>\n
            artery and nerves and other blood vessels were cut, even cutting<\/p>\n
            the trachea oesophagus and spinal cord and cervical spine.<\/p>\n
            4. Lacerated wound 4 x 2 cms in size muscle deep with clotted<\/p>\n
            blood was present on apex of right shoulder.\n<\/p>\n
            5. Incised wound 3 x 1 cms skin deep on right upper arm on<\/p>\n
            lateral side in upper 1\/3rd Clotted blood was present. Wound<\/p>\n
            was longitudely.\n<\/p>\n
            6. Incised wound on left side of neck in left trapezius area. 6 x<\/p>\n
            4 cms size 4 cms in depth. Clotted blood was present.<\/p>\n
            Underlying muscles were cut. There was no bony injury.”<\/p>\n
            In the opinion of the Doctor, the cause of death was shock and<\/p>\n
haemorrhage as a result of aforementioned injuries. All the injuries were<\/p>\n
ante mortem in nature and were sufficient to cause death in normal course of
\n Crl. Appeals No. 113 & 124-DB of 2001                      [ 5   ]<\/p>\n
life. Doctor Adarsh Sharma further opined that injury Nos. 1 to 3, 5 and 6<\/p>\n
were caused by a sharp edged heavy weapon and injury No.4 by a blunt<\/p>\n
weapon.\n<\/p>\n
            On 26.7.1999, investigation of the case was handed over to<\/p>\n
Inspector Mohan Lal as per orders of the Superintendent of Police, Ambala.<\/p>\n
All the accused were produced before PW-21 Mohan Lal by Sarpanch of<\/p>\n
village Garhi Jhinjhara. During interrogation, accused Raj Singh @<\/p>\n
Rajinder made a disclosure statement Ex.PP that he had concealed an axe<\/p>\n
under the heap of the wheat husk in his room, of which none else was<\/p>\n
having the knowledge and he could get the same recovered. Thereafter, he<\/p>\n
led the police party to the place of occurrence and got the axe Ex.P5<\/p>\n
recovered. Sketch of the axe Ex. PS was prepared. Parcel of the axe was<\/p>\n
also prepared and sealed with seal MS and was taken into possession vide<\/p>\n
memo Ex.PP\/1 duly attested by the witnesses. Rough site plan of the place<\/p>\n
of recovery of axe Ex.PT was also prepared.\n<\/p>\n
            On completion of the entire investigation, report under Section<\/p>\n
173 Cr.P.C. was filed in the Court.\n<\/p>\n
            Finding a prima facie case, all the accused were charge-sheeted<\/p>\n
for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC to<\/p>\n
which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.<\/p>\n
            In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as<\/p>\n
21 witnesses. The complainant Ranjit, who was also an eye-witness to the<\/p>\n
occurrence, appeared as PW-17 and deposed in detail about the manner in<\/p>\n
which the occurrence had taken place. Another eye-witness Pawan Kumar,<\/p>\n
who was allegedly the companion of the deceased Siri Ram, appeared as<\/p>\n
PW12. However, this witness was declared hostile. Dr. Adarsh Sharma,
\n Crl. Appeals No. 113 & 124-DB of 2001                        [ 6    ]<\/p>\n
Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Sonepat, who conducted the post-mortem<\/p>\n
on the dead body of Siri Ram, appeared as PW-16 and ASI Mehtab Singh,<\/p>\n
who recorded the First Information Report, appeared as PW-13. Various<\/p>\n
other formal witnesses were also examined and thereafter the prosecution<\/p>\n
case was closed.\n<\/p>\n
             The statement of the accused were recorded under Section 313<\/p>\n
Cr. P.C. wherein all the incriminating circumstances were put to them and<\/p>\n
they denied the prosecution allegations and stated that they have been<\/p>\n
falsely implicated in the present case.\n<\/p>\n
             The trial Court after taking into consideration the entire<\/p>\n
evidence, held that the prosecution was successful in proving the guilt of all<\/p>\n
the accused and accordingly convicted them under Section 302\/34 IPC and<\/p>\n
sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.<\/p>\n
             Mr. Vinod Ghai, counsel for the appellants, has vehemently<\/p>\n
argued that there was an inordinate delay in lodging the FIR. Learned<\/p>\n
counsel submits that the occurrence had taken place on 23.7.1999 at about<\/p>\n
5:00 P.M. whereas PW-13 ASI Mehtab Singh sent the Ruqa Ex.PB\/1 at<\/p>\n
8:05 P.M. which was received in the Police Station at 10:40 P.M. The<\/p>\n
special report reached the Illaqa Magistrate at 7:00 A.M. on 24.7.1999. It is<\/p>\n
contended that the names of the accused were introduced subsequently.<\/p>\n
             This argument raised by the counsel for the appellants is<\/p>\n
without any merit as the occurrence had taken place at 5:00 P.M. and the<\/p>\n
information was sent to PW-13 ASI Mehtab Singh immediately after some<\/p>\n
time. PW-16 ASI Mehtab Singh sent the Ruqa Ex.PB\/1 at 8:05 P.M. on the<\/p>\n
basis of which formal FIR Ex.PB\/2 was recorded at 10:40 P.M. It is<\/p>\n
pertinent to mention here that the distance between the place of occurrence
\n Crl. Appeals No. 113 & 124-DB of 2001                       [ 7   ]<\/p>\n
and Police Station GRPS Sonepat was 20 Kms. and hence it cannot be said<\/p>\n
that there was any delay in lodging the FIR. The names of all the accused<\/p>\n
have been duly mentioned in the FIR.\n<\/p>\n
            Apart from the above, PW13 ASI Mehtab Singh had reached<\/p>\n
the spot after receiving the information. At that time, he was at Police<\/p>\n
Station Ganaur. It would have obviously taken some time to reach from<\/p>\n
Ganaur to the place of occurrence and, hence, it is held that there was no<\/p>\n
delay in lodging the FIR.\n<\/p>\n
            Learned counsel has further submitted that the presence of the<\/p>\n
complainant Ranjit (PW-17) is doubtful at the place of occurrence and that<\/p>\n
the accused Rajinder has been falsely implicated in the present case.<\/p>\n
Learned counsel submits that PW-17 Ranjit was not present at the spot and<\/p>\n
he was called from his house and thereafter his statement was recorded in<\/p>\n
order to falsely implicate the accused. This argument is also without merit<\/p>\n
as the dead body of Siri Ram was found near Gate No.39-C where Ranjit<\/p>\n
was on duty. His duty hours were from 8:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. His presence<\/p>\n
at the spot was natural. The complainant has given a detailed account of the<\/p>\n
manner in which the accused Rajinder @ Raj Singh had inflicted axe blows<\/p>\n
on the neck of the deceased. This witness has categorically stated that Raj<\/p>\n
Singh gave 2-3 axe blows on the person of Siri Ram on the neck and the<\/p>\n
temple. As a result of receiving the axe blows, Siri Ram died at the spot.<\/p>\n
The testimony of Ranjit (PW-17) has not been shaken in any manner by the<\/p>\n
defence. His deposition is consistent with the statement made by him before<\/p>\n
PW-13 ASI Mehtab Singh on the basis of which FIR was recorded. The<\/p>\n
statement of this witness is also corroborated by the evidence of Dr. Adarsh<\/p>\n
Sharma (PW-16). Thus, in our considered opinion, we hold that the
\n Crl. Appeals No. 113 & 124-DB of 2001                       [ 8   ]<\/p>\n
deceased Siri Ram was murdered by the accused Rajinder @ Raj Singh.<\/p>\n
            Mr. Ghai has further argued that as far as accused Inder and<\/p>\n
Mukesh Kumar are concerned, they had no motive to commit the crime. He<\/p>\n
further submits that both these accused had come unarmed and did not have<\/p>\n
any weapon. It is submitted that the accused Inder and Mukesh Kumar<\/p>\n
caused no injury to the deceased and do not have any relationship with the<\/p>\n
accused. Learned counsel further submits that the independent witness<\/p>\n
Pawan Kumar, who was riding the scooter, also did not support the<\/p>\n
prosecution. Learned counsel has further submitted that it was not possible<\/p>\n
for the accused Rajinder to inflict injuries with an axe if Inder and Mukesh<\/p>\n
had caught hold of the deceased. It is contended that in case Inder and<\/p>\n
Mukesh were catching hold of the deceased then they would have come in<\/p>\n
the way of Rajinder, who is alleged to have caused the injuries with an axe.<\/p>\n
It is, thus, submitted that both Inder and Mukesh are liable to be given the<\/p>\n
benefit of doubt.\n<\/p>\n
            This argument has been vehemently denied by the counsel for<\/p>\n
the State who has submitted that both the accused Inder as well as Mukesh<\/p>\n
Kumar had come together with Rajinder @ Raj Singh. Both these accused<\/p>\n
are alleged to have stopped the scooter being driven by Pawan Kumar on<\/p>\n
which the deceased was sitting on the pillion and had also caught hold of<\/p>\n
the deceased and, hence they had the common intention to commit the<\/p>\n
murder of Siri Ram.\n<\/p>\n
            We have examined this aspect very carefully. A perusal of the<\/p>\n
aforementioned facts shows that the accused Inder and Mukesh Kumar were<\/p>\n
not related to the accused Rajinder in any manner. Ranjit Singh (PW-17) in<\/p>\n
his cross-examination has admitted that Inder and Mukesh Kumar do not
\n Crl. Appeals No. 113 & 124-DB of 2001                         [ 9    ]<\/p>\n
belong to the family of the accused Rajinder son of Zile Singh. They also<\/p>\n
did not have any motive to commit the murder of Siri Ram and in fact the<\/p>\n
entire motive was on the part of Rajinder as it was his father Zile Singh who<\/p>\n
was allegedly killed by the deceased Siri Ram. Apart from the above, the<\/p>\n
accused Inder and Mukesh Kumar came unarmed at the place of occurrence<\/p>\n
and did not cause any injury to the deceased. All the injuries on the person<\/p>\n
of the deceased were caused with an axe by the accused Rajinder. If the<\/p>\n
accused Inder and Mukesh Kumar had shared the common intention to<\/p>\n
commit the murder of Siri Ram, then they would have definitely come<\/p>\n
armed with a weapon. However, as noticed earlier, both the accused had<\/p>\n
come empty handed.\n<\/p>\n
             Apart from the above, we are also of the considered opinion<\/p>\n
that it was not possible for the accused Rajinder to inflict numerous blows<\/p>\n
with an axe on the neck and temple of the deceased Siri Ram in case he was<\/p>\n
caught hold by the accused Inder and Mukesh. Thus, in our considered view<\/p>\n
the accused Inder and Mukesh Kumar are entitled to be given the benefit of<\/p>\n
doubt.\n<\/p>\n
             As a result of the foregoing discussion, Criminal Appeal No.<\/p>\n
113-DB of 2001 filed by the accused Inder and Mukesh Kumar is accepted<\/p>\n
and both these accused are given the benefit of doubt and are acquitted of<\/p>\n
the charges under Section 302\/34 IPC. In case, they are in jail, they be set at<\/p>\n
liberty forthwith in this case.\n<\/p>\n
             As far as Criminal Appeal No. 124-DB of 2001 filed by<\/p>\n
Rajinder @ Raj Singh is concerned, we find no merit in this appeal and the<\/p>\n
same is dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
             Resultantly, in case Rajinder @ Raj Singh is on bail then his
\n Crl. Appeals No. 113 & 124-DB of 2001                       [ 10   ]<\/p>\n
bail bonds are cancelled and he be taken into custody forthwith to serve out<\/p>\n
the remaining portion of his sentence. The judgment of the trial Court is<\/p>\n
modified to the extent indicated above.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\n                                          ( ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA )\n                                                   JUDGE\n\n\n\n28.11.2009                                ( JITENDRA CHAUHAN )\nRupi                                              JUDGE\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Inder And Another vs The State Of Haryana on 28 November, 2009 Crl. Appeals No. 113 & 124-DB of 2001 [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl. Appeal No. 113-DB of 2001 Date of Decision: Nov.28,2009 Inder and another……………………………………………. Appellants Versus The State of Haryana…………………………………….. Respondent […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-233905","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nInder And Another vs The State Of Haryana on 28 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Inder And Another vs The State Of Haryana on 28 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-11-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-10-09T05:52:06+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=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Inder And Another vs The State Of Haryana on 28 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-09T05:52:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":2542,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009\",\"name\":\"Inder And Another vs The State Of Haryana on 28 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-09T05:52:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Inder And Another vs The State Of Haryana on 28 November, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Inder And Another vs The State Of Haryana on 28 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Inder And Another vs The State Of Haryana on 28 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-10-09T05:52:06+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":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Inder And Another vs The State Of Haryana on 28 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-09T05:52:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009"},"wordCount":2542,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009","name":"Inder And Another vs The State Of Haryana on 28 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-09T05:52:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/inder-and-another-vs-the-state-of-haryana-on-28-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Inder And Another vs The State Of Haryana on 28 November, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/233905","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=233905"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/233905\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=233905"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=233905"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=233905"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}