{"id":235374,"date":"2009-07-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-07-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009"},"modified":"2018-06-11T14:10:39","modified_gmt":"2018-06-11T08:40:39","slug":"ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009","title":{"rendered":"Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 21 July, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 21 July, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>                         Crl. Revn. No. 968 of 1996                        1\n\n\n\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.\n\n\n                         Case No. : Crl. Revn. No. 968 of 1996\n                         Date of Decision : July 17, 2009\n\n\n             Ramesh Kumar                          ....   Petitioner\n                         Vs.\n             State of Haryana                      ....   Respondent<\/pre>\n<p>CORAM : HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL<\/p>\n<p>                         *     *   *<\/p>\n<p>Present :   Mr. A. S. Virk, Advocate<br \/>\n            for the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>            Mr. Sidharth Sarup, AAG, Haryana.\n<\/p>\n<pre>                         *     *   *\n\nL. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) :\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>            Ramesh Kumar has filed this revision petition challenging his<br \/>\nconviction and sentence recorded by both the courts below.\n<\/p>\n<p>            According to the prosecution case, on 06.07.1992, complainant<br \/>\nRam Chander along with his mother Yashoda Devi were going to Dehradun<br \/>\nto meet the complainant&#8217;s sister. They were present at Bus Stand Gurgaon<br \/>\non Delhi booth, where Bus No. HR-26-A-1164 was parked. Complainant&#8217;s<br \/>\nmother started boarding the bus from front window, but the petitioner, who<br \/>\nwas driver of the bus, suddenly started driving the bus and resultantly,<br \/>\ncomplainant&#8217;s mother fell down. The complainant requested bus driver to<br \/>\nstop the bus, but the driver sped away the bus. As a result of accident, both<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                           Crl. Revn. No. 968 of 1996                      2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>legs of complainant&#8217;s mother were run over by the bus under the rear wheel<br \/>\nand she succumbed to her injuries in the hospital.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon vide judgment<br \/>\ndated 04.09.1995, convicted the petitioner under Sections 279 and 304-A of<br \/>\nthe Indian Penal Code (in short &#8211; IPC) and vide order dated 05.09.1995,<br \/>\nsentenced the petitioner to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and<br \/>\nto pay fine of Rs.2,000\/- and in default thereof, to undergo simple<br \/>\nimprisonment for three months for offence under Section 304-A IPC and<br \/>\nalso sentenced the petitioner to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three<br \/>\nmonths and to pay fine of Rs.500\/- and in default thereof, to undergo simple<br \/>\nimprisonment for fifteen days for offence under Section 279 IPC. Both the<br \/>\nsentences were ordered to run concurrently.          Appeal preferred by the<br \/>\npetitioner stands dismissed by learned Sessions Judge, Gurgaon vide<br \/>\njudgment dated 29.11.1996. Feeling still aggrieved, the instant revision<br \/>\npetition has been preferred by the convict.\n<\/p>\n<p>             I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the<br \/>\ncase file.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Complainant Ram Chander and his brother-in-law Ramesh<br \/>\nChand both eye-witnesses broadly supported the prosecution case. Other<br \/>\nevidence was also led by the prosecution.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Both the courts below have recorded concurrent finding of guilt<br \/>\nof the petitioner on appreciation of evidence. The said finding cannot be<br \/>\nsaid to be perverse or illegal so as to warrant interference at the hands of<br \/>\nthis Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that<br \/>\nidentity of the petitioner as driver of the offending bus at the time of<br \/>\naccident is not established. Name of the petitioner as driver was disclosed<br \/>\nto the police by PW Ramesh Chand. However, in the witness-box, Ramesh<br \/>\nChand stated that he could not identify the bus driver. On the other hand,<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                          Crl. Revn. No. 968 of 1996                         3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Ram Chander complainant specifically identified the petitioner         in the<br \/>\nCourt to be the driver of the offending bus at the time of accident. Learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the petitioner contended that the said identification in the Court<br \/>\nis no identification in the eyes of law because no test identification parade<br \/>\nwas held. Reliance in support of this contention has been placed on various<br \/>\njudgments namely &#8211; a judgment of Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court in the case of<br \/>\nRameshwar Singh        vs.   State of J. and K. reported as       AIR 1972<br \/>\nSupreme Court 102 (1), a judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of<br \/>\nRattan Baxi vs. The State reported as 1998 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 108,<br \/>\na judgment of this Court in the case of Sunder @ Suinder vs. State of<br \/>\nHaryana reported as 1999 (2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 554               and another<br \/>\njudgment of this Court in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/7789\/\">State of Punjab vs. Balraj Singh<\/a><br \/>\nreported as 2000 (1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 822.\n<\/p>\n<p>            On the other hand, learned State counsel contended that<br \/>\nstatement of Ram Chander establishes the identity of the petitioner as driver<br \/>\nof the offending bus. Relying on a judgment of Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court in<br \/>\nthe case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1759478\/\">Mahabir vs. State of Delhi<\/a> reported as 2008 (3) Recent<br \/>\nCriminal Reports 5, it was contended by learned State counsel that<br \/>\nidentification of the accused in Court for the first time cannot be said to be<br \/>\ninadmissible in evidence.\n<\/p>\n<p>            Decision on identity of the accused is given on the basis of<br \/>\nfacts and evidence of each case. In the instant case, the identity of the<br \/>\npetitioner as driver of the offending bus is fully proved from the testimony<br \/>\nof Ram Chander complainant. The complainant had no enmity with the<br \/>\npetitioner. There is no reason why he would falsely identify the petitioner<br \/>\nin the Court. In the case of Rattan Baxi (supra), the bus, after causing<br \/>\nthe accident, was sped away without stopping at the spot. In addition to it,<br \/>\nthe witness admitted in cross-examination that he could not identify the bus<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                           Crl. Revn. No. 968 of 1996                           4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>driver at the spot. Consequently, it was held that the witness could not<br \/>\nhave, therefore, identified the driver in the Court, if he had not identified the<br \/>\ndriver at the spot. In the case of Balraj Singh (supra), there were other<br \/>\ninfirmities also in the prosecution evidence. Name of the accused being the<br \/>\ndriver of the offending truck was supplied to the police by the conductor.<br \/>\nHowever, the said conductor, who also slipped away from the spot, was not<br \/>\nlocated by the police, nor his statement was recorded. Moreover, that was a<br \/>\ncase of appeal against acquittal, when the Court is slow to interfere with the<br \/>\njudgment of acquittal. The case of Rameshwar Singh (supra) was a case<br \/>\nunder Sections 302 and 307 IPC and therefore, the question of identity of<br \/>\naccused involved in the said case cannot be said to be similar to identity of<br \/>\nthe offending driver in the instant case of accident. In the case of Sunder<br \/>\n@ Suinder      (supra) also, the petitioner was acquitted on the basis of<br \/>\nevidence in that case regarding identity. In the instant case, it is very<br \/>\nsignificant to notice that the bus was already present at the Bus Stand in<br \/>\nstationary condition and therefore, the complainant had ample time to see its<br \/>\ndriver and could therefore, identify the bus driver in the Court. On facts and<br \/>\nevidence in the instant case, it cannot be said that identity of the petitioner<br \/>\nas driver of the offending bus is not established.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Learned counsel for the petitioner also contended that specific<br \/>\nquestions were not put to the petitioner in his examination under Section<br \/>\n313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short &#8211; Cr.P.C.) and therefore,<br \/>\nthe conviction cannot be sustained. Reliance in support of this contention<br \/>\nhas been placed on a judgment of Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court of India in the<br \/>\ncase of Lattu Mahto and another               vs. The State of Bihar (now<br \/>\nJharkhand)      reported as 2008 (3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 467 and also a<br \/>\njudgment of this Court in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/100228187\/\">Ram Dhan vs. State of Haryana<\/a><br \/>\nreported as 1974 C.L.R. (Vol.II) 47. This contention is also untenable. No<br \/>\nprejudice is shown to have been caused to the petitioner merely because<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                             Crl. Revn. No. 968 of 1996                          5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>main incriminating evidence was put to him in a single question in<br \/>\nexamination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. In the absence of prejudice, no<br \/>\nbenefit can be extended to the petitioner in exercise of revisional<br \/>\njurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n<p>                In view of the aforesaid, I find no illegality or infirmity in the<br \/>\njudgments of the courts below regarding conviction of the petitioner so as to<br \/>\nwarrant interference in exercise of revisional jurisdiction. Conviction of the<br \/>\npetitioner is accordingly affirmed.\n<\/p>\n<p>                Learned counsel for the petitioner also contended that accident<br \/>\ntook place 17 years ago and therefore, sentence warrants reduction or the<br \/>\npetitioner may be released on probation.\n<\/p>\n<p>                I have carefully considered the contention.\n<\/p>\n<p>                Benefit of probation cannot be extended to the petitioner as he<br \/>\ncaused death of a woman by his rash and negligent act. Moreover, after<br \/>\ncausing the accident, the petitioner sped away the bus and therefore, his<br \/>\nconduct was callous. However, keeping in view the fact that the accident<br \/>\noccurred 17 years ago, there is some scope for reduction in sentence.<br \/>\nAccordingly, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year for offence<br \/>\nunder Section 304-A IPC is reduced to rigorous imprisonment for nine<br \/>\nmonths while maintaining the sentence of fine and sentence in default<br \/>\nthereof for the said offence as well as while maintaining the sentence under<br \/>\nSection 279 IPC. With reduction in sentence as aforesaid, the revision<br \/>\npetition stands disposed of accordingly.\n<\/p>\n<p>                The petitioner, who is on bail, shall surrender to his bail bonds<br \/>\nor shall be arrested to undergo the remaining period of sentence.\n<\/p>\n<pre>July 17, 2009                                          ( L. N. MITTAL )\nmonika                                                       JUDGE\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Punjab-Haryana High Court Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 21 July, 2009 Crl. Revn. No. 968 of 1996 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : Crl. Revn. No. 968 of 1996 Date of Decision : July 17, 2009 Ramesh Kumar &#8230;. Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana &#8230;. [&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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-235374","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 21 July, 2009 - 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\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 21 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-07-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-06-11T08:40:39+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 21 July, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-11T08:40:39+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1414,\"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\\\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009\",\"name\":\"Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 21 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-07-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-06-11T08:40:39+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 21 July, 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":"Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 21 July, 2009 - 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\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 21 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-07-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-06-11T08:40:39+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 21 July, 2009","datePublished":"2009-07-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-11T08:40:39+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009"},"wordCount":1414,"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\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009","name":"Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 21 July, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-07-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-06-11T08:40:39+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ramesh-kumar-vs-state-of-haryana-on-21-july-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ramesh Kumar vs State Of Haryana on 21 July, 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\/235374","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=235374"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/235374\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=235374"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=235374"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=235374"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}