{"id":239639,"date":"2009-11-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-19T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009"},"modified":"2017-07-17T02:10:57","modified_gmt":"2017-07-16T20:40:57","slug":"dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"Dharam Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 20 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Dharam Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 20 November, 2009<\/div>\n
Crl. Revision No.2452 of 2002                                       -1-\n\n\n\n    IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT\n                    CHANDIGARH\n\n                                CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2452 OF 2002.\n                                     DATE OF DECISION : 20-11-2009.\n\n\n\n\nDharam Pal and others.\n                                                  ...... PETITIONERS\n\n                                    Versus\n\n\nState of Haryana.\n                                                  ..... RESPONDENT\n\n\n\nCORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA\n\n\nPresent:      Mr. A.S.Kalra, Advocate and\n              Ms. Sukhpreet Kaur, Advocate\n              for the petitioners.\n\n              Mr. S.S.Randhawa, Additional A.G., Haryana.\n                         ***\n\n\nRAM CHAND GUPTA, J.\n<\/pre>\n
              This revision petition is directed against the judgment<\/p>\n
dated 16.10.2002 rendered by the court of Additional Sessions Judge,<\/p>\n
Hisar, vide which it dismissed the appeal against the judgment of<\/p>\n
conviction dated 11.11.1998 and order of sentence dated 12.11.1998<\/p>\n
rendered by the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hisar convicting the<\/p>\n
accused i.e. the present revision-petitioners and awarding them<\/p>\n
sentences to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months
\n Crl. Revision No.2452 of 2002                                         -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
each for the commission of offence punishable under Section 148 of<\/p>\n
Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’). R.I. for a period of<\/p>\n
six months each and to pay a fine of Rs.100\/- each for the commission<\/p>\n
of offence under Section 323 IPC read with Section 149 IPC and in<\/p>\n
default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for one month each.<\/p>\n
R.I. for one year each and to pay a fine of Rs.200\/- each for commission<\/p>\n
of offence under Section 324 IPC read with Section 149 IPC and in<\/p>\n
default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for two months. R.I.<\/p>\n
for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500\/- each for<\/p>\n
commission of offence under Section 326 IPC read with Section 149<\/p>\n
IPC and in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for six<\/p>\n
months.     It was further ordered that on deposit of fine, a sum of<\/p>\n
Rs.2000\/- out of the same would be paid to the complainant and the<\/p>\n
other injured as compensation in equal shares and the remaining<\/p>\n
amount shall be the costs of proceedings. It was also ordered that<\/p>\n
substantive sentences shall run concurrently.\n<\/p>\n
2.            The facts, in brief, are that Hawa Singh son of Surjit had<\/p>\n
got a case registered against Sadhu Ram – complainant and his brother<\/p>\n
Basakhi about one and half month before this occurrence and since then<\/p>\n
they were inimical towards them. On 11.10.1989 at about 6.00 AM,<\/p>\n
Sadhu Ram alongwith his brother Basakhi were sitting near a tubewell<\/p>\n
and having tea whereas Smt. Phuli wife of Basakhi was sitting near the<\/p>\n
engine of the tubewell when in the meantime accused Dharam Pal<\/p>\n
armed with Gandasi and accused Ram Singh son of Phulia, Manga son<\/p>\n
of Mai Lal, Hawa Singh son of Surjit and Chander son of Sarupa all
\n Crl. Revision No.2452 of 2002                                            -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
armed with lathis came their and raised Lalkara that complainant and<\/p>\n
his brother would be taught a lesson as they had quarrelled with them<\/p>\n
about a one and half month ago.            They caused injuries to the<\/p>\n
complainant and his brother Basakhi with their respective weapons. On<\/p>\n
alarm being raised one Govardhan son of Ramji Lal and Smt. Phuli who<\/p>\n
was sitting near the engine of the tubewell, came there and rescued<\/p>\n
them from the clutches of the accused and thereafter they ran away with<\/p>\n
their respective weapons.\n<\/p>\n
3.            Case was registered on the statement of Sadhu Ram –<\/p>\n
complainant after he was declared fit to make the statement by the<\/p>\n
Doctor. Injuries on the person of Sadhu Ram and Basakhi were got<\/p>\n
medically examined. Statements of the witnesses were recorded. After<\/p>\n
completion of investigation, report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was filed<\/p>\n
against the accused i.e. the present revision-petitioners for their trial for<\/p>\n
offences under Sections 148\/323\/324\/326 IPC read with Section 149<\/p>\n
IPC. The accused were charged accordingly by the learned trial court<\/p>\n
to which they did not plead guilty and claimed trial.<\/p>\n
4.            In order to substantiate the allegations against the accused,<\/p>\n
the prosecution examined as many as 7 witnesses. PW1 is Sadhu Ram,<\/p>\n
injured – complainant; PW2 is Basakhi another injured, PW3 is Smt.<\/p>\n
Phuli, eye-witness; PW4 is Laddu Ram; PW5 is Murari Lal; PW6 is<\/p>\n
Dr. S.K.Batta; Statement of Ram Mehar was also recorded as PW6 and<\/p>\n
PW7 is Chander Bhan, ASI.\n<\/p>\n
5.            Statements of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C were<\/p>\n
recorded by the learned trial court in which they denied the assertion of
\n Crl. Revision No.2452 of 2002                                            -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
the prosecution witnesses and had taken the plea that they were falsely<\/p>\n
implicated in this case. However, they did not lead any evidence in<\/p>\n
their defence.\n<\/p>\n
6.            Learned Trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused<\/p>\n
as aforementioned after hearing Public Prosecutor for the State and<\/p>\n
learned counsel for the accused and after going through the evidence.<\/p>\n
Feeling aggrieved against the judgment of the trial court, an appeal was<\/p>\n
preferred by the present revision-petitioners, which was dismissed by<\/p>\n
the court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hisar vide<\/p>\n
impugned judgment against which the present revision petition has<\/p>\n
been filed.\n<\/p>\n
7.            I have heard Mr. A.S.Kalra, learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
revision-petitioners and Mr. S.S.Randhawa, Additional Advocate<\/p>\n
General, Haryana and have gone through the record carefully.<\/p>\n
8.            Conviction of the present revision-petitioners has not been<\/p>\n
challenged by the learned counsel for the revision-petitioner. Even<\/p>\n
otherwise, perusal of evidence brought on the record fairly goes to<\/p>\n
show that concurrent findings recorded by the courts below are based<\/p>\n
on cogent, convincing, reliable and trustworthy evidence of both the<\/p>\n
injured and Smt. Phuli and the same are duly corroborated by medical<\/p>\n
evidence and hence, concurrent findings recorded by the courts below<\/p>\n
cannot be said to be perverse in any manner.\n<\/p>\n
9.            It is settled principle of law that while exercising revisional<\/p>\n
jurisdiction, this court cannot re-evaluate and reappreciate the evidence<\/p>\n
until and unless it comes to the conclusion that the courts below,
\n Crl. Revision No.2452 of 2002                                         -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
committed an illegality in the conduct of trial or the procedure adopted<\/p>\n
was illegal or findings recorded were perverse and grossly erroneous<\/p>\n
resulting into miscarriage of justice. In the present case, deposition of<\/p>\n
both the injured witnesses i.e. Sadhu Ram – complainant, PW1 and<\/p>\n
Basakhi, PW2 and another eye-witness Smt. Phuli, PW3 is consistent<\/p>\n
on all the material points. Hence, there is nothing as to why their sworn<\/p>\n
testimony be disbelieved.\n<\/p>\n
10.           However, it has been argued by the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
revision-petitioners that the occurrence had taken place on 11.10.1989<\/p>\n
and that hence, the present revision-petitioners are facing criminal<\/p>\n
proceedings for the last about 20 years. He has further argued that one<\/p>\n
of the accused Manga is at present 82 years of age, Balwant is 57\/58<\/p>\n
years of age, Chander is 52\/53 years of age, Hawa Singh is 46 years of<\/p>\n
age and Dharam Pal is 48\/49 years of age. It is further contended that<\/p>\n
they had already undergone imprisonment for 20 days during trial and<\/p>\n
about 5 months after conviction.       Hence, it is contended that the<\/p>\n
quantum of sentence of the revision-petitioners be reduced to the period<\/p>\n
already undergone by them during trial of the case and after conviction.<\/p>\n
11.           Learned counsel for the revision-petitioners placed reliance<\/p>\n
upon Lal singh and another v. State of Punjab, 2006(2) RCR(Crl.) 299,<\/p>\n
in which, on the facts and circumstances of that case, a coordinate<\/p>\n
Bench of this Court has reduced the sentence to the period already<\/p>\n
undergone in offence under Section 326 IPC read with Section 34 IPC.<\/p>\n
He has also placed reliance upon Vekategowda and others v. State of<\/p>\n
Karnataka, 2007(1) RCR(Crl.) 152, wherein accused faced legal battle
\n Crl. Revision No.2452 of 2002                                         -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
for 20 years and sentence was reduced from five years to one year by<\/p>\n
the Hon’ble Apex Court.\n<\/p>\n
12.           As per the case of prosecution only revision petitioner<\/p>\n
No.1 – Dharam Pal was armed with sharp edged weapon i.e. Gandasi<\/p>\n
whereas other accused were armed with Lathis.          Hence, injury for<\/p>\n
commission of offence under Section 326 IPC read with Section 149<\/p>\n
IPC has been attributed to accused – Dharam Pal only. All the revision-<\/p>\n
petitioners are facing criminal proceedings for the last about 20 years.<\/p>\n
One of the accused is aged about 82 years, accused Balwant and<\/p>\n
Chander are more than 50 years of age. Hence, there is force in the<\/p>\n
argument of learned counsel for the revision-petitioners that they<\/p>\n
deserve some leniency in the matter of sentence.\n<\/p>\n
13.           Hence, while maintaining the conviction of the accused for<\/p>\n
offences under Sections 148\/323\/324\/326 IPC read with Section 149<\/p>\n
IPC, the substantive sentence of accused – Dharam Pal who was armed<\/p>\n
with Gandasi is reduced to one year for commission of offence under<\/p>\n
Section 326 read with Section 149 IPC and however, the amount of fine<\/p>\n
is enhanced to Rs.10,000\/-.         While maintaining the substantive<\/p>\n
sentences awarded for other offences, the amount of fine is enhanced to<\/p>\n
Rs.2000\/- for commission of offence under Section 324 IPC, Rs.1000\/-<\/p>\n
for commission of offence under Section 323 IPC and Rs.1000\/- for<\/p>\n
commission of offence under Section 148 IPC.\n<\/p>\n
14.           Substantive sentences of remaining revision-petitioners i.e.<\/p>\n
Manga, Hawa Singh, Chander and Balwant is reduced to the period<\/p>\n
already undergone by them during trial and after conviction. However,
\n Crl. Revision No.2452 of 2002                                         -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
amount of fine is enhanced to Rs.5000\/- each for commission of<\/p>\n
offence under Section 326 IPC read with Section 149 IPC, Rs.2000\/-<\/p>\n
each for commission of offence under Section 324 IPC, Rs.1000\/- each<\/p>\n
for commission of offence under Section 323 IPC and Rs.1000\/- each<\/p>\n
for commission of offence under Section 148 IPC.\n<\/p>\n
15.           Out of the total fine to be recovered, Rs.40,000\/- shall be<\/p>\n
paid to injured Basakhi as compensation and Rs.10,000\/- shall be paid<\/p>\n
to another injured, Sadhu Ram as compensation.\n<\/p>\n
16.           Hence, the present revision petition is dismissed except for<\/p>\n
modification in the quantum of sentence as aforementioned.<\/p>\n
17.           The accused Manga, Hawa Singh, Chander and Balwant<\/p>\n
shall stand discharged from their bail bonds.\n<\/p>\n
18.           Bail bond and surety bonds of accused – Dharam Pal stand<\/p>\n
cancelled.      The concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate shall take<\/p>\n
necessary steps to comply with the judgment with due promptitude<\/p>\n
keeping in view the applicability of provisions of Section 428 of the<\/p>\n
Code of Criminal Procedure and submit his compliance report within<\/p>\n
two months.\n<\/p>\n
19.           The District and Sessions Judge concerned is also directed<\/p>\n
to ensure that the directions are complied with and that compliance<\/p>\n
report is sent within the time limit, to this Court.<\/p>\n
                                               ( RAM CHAND GUPTA )
\nNovember 20, 2009.                                   JUDGE
\n‘om’\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Dharam Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 20 November, 2009 Crl. Revision No.2452 of 2002 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2452 OF 2002. DATE OF DECISION : 20-11-2009. Dharam Pal and others. …… PETITIONERS Versus State of Haryana. ….. RESPONDENT CORAM:- […]<\/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-239639","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nDharam Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 20 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\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Dharam Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 20 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-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=\"2009-11-19T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-07-16T20:40:57+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Dharam Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 20 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-16T20:40:57+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1652,\"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\\\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009\",\"name\":\"Dharam Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 20 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-19T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-07-16T20:40:57+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Dharam Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 20 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":"Dharam Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 20 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\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Dharam Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 20 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-19T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-07-16T20:40:57+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Dharam Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 20 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-16T20:40:57+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009"},"wordCount":1652,"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\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009","name":"Dharam Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 20 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-19T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-07-16T20:40:57+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/dharam-pal-and-others-vs-state-of-haryana-on-20-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Dharam Pal And Others vs State Of Haryana on 20 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\/239639","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=239639"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/239639\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=239639"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=239639"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=239639"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}