{"id":234510,"date":"2009-09-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-08-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009"},"modified":"2017-12-19T20:48:58","modified_gmt":"2017-12-19T15:18:58","slug":"atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009","title":{"rendered":"Atul Chandra Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n
Atul Chandra Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2009<\/div>\n
    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI\n                       Cr.M.P. No. 1216 of 2006\n\n    1. Atul Chandra Mahto\n    2. Mohan Mahto\n    3. Umesh Mahto\n    4. Dilip Kumar Mahto           ...      ...     Petitioners\n                      Vs.\n    1. The State of Jharkhand\n    2. Chandra Deo Mahto           ...      ...     Opposite Parties\n\n    CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR\n\n    For the Petitioners: Mr. Brij Bihari Sinha, Advocate\n    For the Opposite Party No. 2 : Mr. Prabir Chatterjee, Advocate\n\n                                   ...\n\n8\/01\/09\/2009<\/pre>\n
    This is an application for quashing the order dated<\/p>\n
    29.06.2008 passed by learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge,<\/p>\n
    Bokaro in S.T. No. 91 of 2003 whereby and whereunder he<\/p>\n
    rejected the application of the petitioners for recalling the<\/p>\n
    prosecution witnesses. The petitioners further pray for quashing<\/p>\n
    the entire criminal proceeding in connection with S.T. No. 91 of<\/p>\n
    2003 on the basis of joint compromise petition filed by the<\/p>\n
    parties.\n<\/p>\n
    2.          It appears that on the basis of written report filed by<\/p>\n
    the informant, Chandra Deo Mahto, Pindrajora P.S. Case No. 19<\/p>\n
    of 2002 dated 14.04.2002 under Sections 147, 148, 323 and 307<\/p>\n
    of the I.P.C. instituted and police took up investigation.      After<\/p>\n
    completing investigation, police submitted charge-sheet and<\/p>\n
    accordingly cognizance was taken under the said Sections. Since,<\/p>\n
    the offence under Section 307 of the I.P.C. is exclusively triable by<\/p>\n
    the court of Sessions, the case was committed to the court of<\/p>\n
    Sessions and accordingly S.T. No. 31 of 2003 was instituted. It<\/p>\n
    further appears that charge framed against the petitioners under<\/p>\n
    Sections 148, 149, 323, 307 of the I.P.C. and thereafter the<\/p>\n
    witnesses were examined. The record further reveals that the<\/p>\n
    statement of accused persons (petitioners) had already been\n<\/p>\n
                           -2-                 [Cr.M.P. No. 1216 of 2006]<\/p>\n
recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. on 23.02.2004.           It further<\/p>\n
appears that on 26.04.2006, a compromise petition filed by the<\/p>\n
parties, but the same has been rejected by the court vide order<\/p>\n
dated 01.06.2006 on the ground that the offence under Section<\/p>\n
148, 149 and 307 of the I.P.C. are not compoundable. Thereafter,<\/p>\n
another   application   filed   on   22.06.2006   for   recalling   the<\/p>\n
prosecution witness Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 under Section 311 of<\/p>\n
the Cr.P.C. because the parties had compromised their case<\/p>\n
outside the court. The said application also rejected by the<\/p>\n
impugned order. Against that the present case has been filed.<\/p>\n
3.          It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner<\/p>\n
that if the parties are inclined to settle the dispute amicably then<\/p>\n
in such circumstance, the trial court ought to have granted<\/p>\n
permission to compromise the case and it is not in the interest of<\/p>\n
justice to proceed any more. Accordingly, it is submitted that the<\/p>\n
refusal to recall the witnesses on the basis of joint compromise<\/p>\n
petition is an abuse of the process of the court, therefore, the<\/p>\n
same cannot be sustained.\n<\/p>\n
4.          On the other hand, learned Additional P.P. submits<\/p>\n
that admittedly the offence under Sections 148, 149 and 307 of<\/p>\n
the I.P.C. is not compoundable as per the provisions contained in<\/p>\n
the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is further submitted that the<\/p>\n
case of the prosecution has already been closed and the<\/p>\n
statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. had also been<\/p>\n
recorded much before the date of filing of compromise petition.<\/p>\n
Under the said circumstance, after the close of the case of<\/p>\n
prosecution the question of recalling prosecution witnesses that<\/p>\n
too on the behest of defence does not arise. It is submitted that<\/p>\n
acquittal of accused on the basis of compromise for an offence<\/p>\n
under Section 307 of I.P.C. is against the society and it involve<\/p>\n
public policy. Accordingly, it is submitted that there is no\n<\/p>\n
                            -3-                 [Cr.M.P. No. 1216 of 2006]<\/p>\n
illegality in the order of court below which requires any<\/p>\n
interference by this Court.\n<\/p>\n
5.          Having heard the submissions, I have gone through<\/p>\n
the record of the case. From perusal of Annexure-3, it appears<\/p>\n
that the statement of accused persons recorded under Section<\/p>\n
313 Cr.P.C. on 23.02.2004.          It further appears that the<\/p>\n
compromise petition has been filed on 26.04.2006, which was<\/p>\n
rejected   by   order   dated 01.06.2006.      Thereafter,     another<\/p>\n
application has been filed for recalling the witnesses on<\/p>\n
22.06.2006 which was disposed of by the learned court below<\/p>\n
vide order dated 29.06.2006.        Thus, it is apparent that on<\/p>\n
22.06.2006 when the application for recalling of witnesses has<\/p>\n
been filed, no compromise petition pending in the court below,<\/p>\n
because the same has already been rejected vide order dated<\/p>\n
01.06.2006. Thus, the ground for recalling of the witnesses is not<\/p>\n
available to the petitioners. Moreover, it appears that the<\/p>\n
compromise petition has been rejected by the learned court below<\/p>\n
taking into account that it is against the interest of the society to<\/p>\n
dispose of cases of serious nature like the cases under Section<\/p>\n
307 of the I.P.C. on the basis of compromise. In Madan Mohan<\/p>\n
Abbot Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582<\/p>\n
Hon’ble Supreme Court held that if dispute between the parties is<\/p>\n
personal and absolutely no public policy involved then the High<\/p>\n
Court in exercise of power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can<\/p>\n
quash the criminal proceeding on the basis of compromise even<\/p>\n
in the cases involving non-compoundable offences. In the instant<\/p>\n
case offence is under Section 307 of the I.P.C. In my view same is<\/p>\n
serious in nature.      Certainly the offence under Section 307 of<\/p>\n
I.P.C. involves public policy because if such cases are allowed to<\/p>\n
be disposed of on the basis of compromise then there is every<\/p>\n
chance of further detoriation of law and order. Thus, I find that\n<\/p>\n
                                -4-                 [Cr.M.P. No. 1216 of 2006]<\/p>\n
     learned court below had rightly concluded that acceptance of<\/p>\n
     compromise in the instant case is not in the interest of society.<\/p>\n
     6.          Section 311 gives power to the court to recall any<\/p>\n
     witness already examined if the court is satisfied that the<\/p>\n
     evidence is essential for the just decision of the case.         From<\/p>\n
     perusal of impugned order dated 22.06.2006, it is clear that the<\/p>\n
     petitioners filed application for recalling the prosecution witness<\/p>\n
     Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 on the ground that the party compromised<\/p>\n
     their case outside the court.    Admittedly, the charge has been<\/p>\n
     framed under Sections 148, 149, 323 and 307 of the I.P.C. It is<\/p>\n
     worth mentioning that the offence under Sections 148, 149 and<\/p>\n
     307 of the I.P.C. are not compoundable. Thus, even if the said<\/p>\n
     compromise will be brought on record by the prosecution<\/p>\n
     witnesses, the fate of the case will not change. Under the said<\/p>\n
     circumstances, recalling of the prosecution witnesses is not<\/p>\n
     essential for the just decision of the present case. Thus, I find<\/p>\n
     that the learned court below has rightly refused to recall the<\/p>\n
     aforesaid prosecution witnesses for further cross-examination.<\/p>\n
     7.          In view of the discussion made hereinbefore, I find<\/p>\n
     that there is no illegality in the order of the court below, which<\/p>\n
     requires any interference by this Court. In the result, I find no<\/p>\n
     merit in this application, the same is dismissed.<\/p>\n
                                              (Prashant Kumar, J.)<\/p>\n
Sunil\/N.A.F.R.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Jharkhand High Court Atul Chandra Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 1216 of 2006 1. Atul Chandra Mahto 2. Mohan Mahto 3. Umesh Mahto 4. Dilip Kumar Mahto … … Petitioners Vs. 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Chandra Deo […]<\/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":[8,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-234510","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAtul Chandra Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 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\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Atul Chandra Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-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=\"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-12-19T15:18:58+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Atul Chandra Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-19T15:18:58+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1084,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jharkhand High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009\",\"name\":\"Atul Chandra Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-12-19T15:18:58+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Atul Chandra Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 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":"Atul Chandra Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 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\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Atul Chandra Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-12-19T15:18:58+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Atul Chandra Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2009","datePublished":"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-19T15:18:58+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009"},"wordCount":1084,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jharkhand High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009","name":"Atul Chandra Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-12-19T15:18:58+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/atul-chandra-mahto-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Atul Chandra Mahto & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 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\/234510","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=234510"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/234510\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=234510"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=234510"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=234510"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}