{"id":243424,"date":"1959-12-02T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1959-12-01T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959"},"modified":"2016-08-26T10:58:56","modified_gmt":"2016-08-26T05:28:56","slug":"state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959","title":{"rendered":"State Of Madhya Pradesh &amp; Ors vs Shardul Singh on 2 December, 1959"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">State Of Madhya Pradesh &amp; Ors vs Shardul Singh on 2 December, 1959<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH &amp; ORS.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSHARDUL SINGH\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n02\/12\/1959\n\nBENCH:\n\n\nACT:\nConstitution  of  India,  Art.\t311(1)\t--If  the  Authority\nempowered  to dismiss should itself initiate or conduct\t the\nenquiry-Article\t 309,  proviso,\t -\"Conditions  of  service\",\nmeaning of.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe  Superintendent  of\t Police\t initiated  a\tdepartmental\ninquiry\t against  the respondent, who was  a  Sub-Inspector,\nwith  respect  to  certain charges, found  him\tguilty,\t and\nforwarded the report to the Inspector-General of Police, who\nwas  the authority competent to dismiss him,  for  necessary\naction.\t The Inspector-General sent a copy of the report  to\nthe  respondent, called upon him to show cause\tagainst\t the\nproposed    punishment\t of   dismissal,   considered\t his\nexplanation,  and  passed  an  order  dismissing  him.\t The\nprocedure  followed was in accordance with  Regulations\t 228\nand   229  of  the  Central  Provinces\tand   Berar   Police\nRegulations  framed under s. 241 of the Government of  India\nAct, 1935, corresponding to Art. 309 of the Constitution.\nOn  the\t question whether the Regulations were\tultra  vires\nbecause, under Art. 311, the authority empowered to  dismiss\n(in  this  case\t the Inspector-General)\t must  have  himself\ninitiated,or conducted the inquiry preceding the dismissal,\nHELD : Under the proviso to Art. 309, power is conferred  on\nthe  President of India and the Governor of a State to\tmake\nrules  Regulating  the\tconditions  of\tservice\t of  persons\nappointed to the civil service of the Union or the State, as\nthe-case  may be, until provision in that behalf is made  by\nan  Act\t of  the appropriate  Legislature.   'Conditions  of\nservice'  means\t all  those conditions\twhich  regulate\t the\nholding\t of  a post by a person right from the time  of\t his\nappointment till his retirement and even beyond, in  matters\nlike  pension  etc.,  and includes  rules  relating  to\t the\ndismissal  of  an  officer.   Article  311  (1)\t confers  an\nadditional  right  on  the civil servant,  namely,  that  no\nperson holding a civil post shall be dismissed or removed by\nan authority subordinate to that by which he was  appointed.\nBut  for that Article rules could have been framed  even  in\nrespect\t to  these matters under Art. 309.   Article  311(l)\nhowever,  does\tnot,  in terms, provide\t that  the  relevant\ndisciplinary  inquiry should also be initiated or  conducted\nby  the\t authority  mentioned in  the  Article.\t  Therefore,\n-rules\tcould  be  framed under Art.  309  with\t respect  to\nconditions  of service other than those in Art.\t 311(l)\t and\nhence,\t the   Regulations  were  not\tultra\t vires\t the\nConstitution. [306 B-E]\n<a href=\"\/doc\/1084416\/\">Pradyat\t Kumar\tBose  V. The Hon'ble the  Chief\t Justice  of\nCalcutta High Court,<\/a> [1955] 2 S.C.R. 1331 and <a href=\"\/doc\/1659001\/\">P. Balakotaiah\nv. Union of India,<\/a> [1958] S.C.R. 1052, followed.\nNorth  West Frontier Province v. Suraj Narain Anand,  (1948)\nL.R. 75 I.A. 343, applied.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>CIVIL  APPELLATE  JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal  No.  2554  of<br \/>\n1966.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">303<\/span><\/p>\n<p>Appeal\tfrom the judgment and order dated November  4,\t1965<br \/>\n,of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Misc.  Petition No. 646<br \/>\nof 1964.\n<\/p>\n<p>I.N. Shroff, for the appellants.\n<\/p>\n<p>A.K.  Sen, M. M. Kshatriya and G. S. Chatterjee, for  the<br \/>\nrespondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\nHegde J. _ Scope of Art. 311(l) of the Constitution comes up<br \/>\nfor  consideration in this appeal by certificate.  The\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt  of  Madhya  Pradesh  has opined\tthat  the  power  of<br \/>\ndismissal  and\tremoval\t referred to in Art. 3 1  1  (\t1  )<br \/>\nimplies that the authorities mentioned in that Article\tmust<br \/>\nalone  initiate\t and  conduct  the  disciplinary  proceeding<br \/>\nculminating  in\t the dismissal or removal  of  a  delinquent<br \/>\nofficer.\n<\/p>\n<p>The  respondent herein was a Sub-Inspector of Police in\t the<br \/>\nState  of  Madhya  Pradesh.   A\t departmental  enquiry\t was<br \/>\ninitiated  against him on the basis of certain\tcharges,  by<br \/>\nthe  Superintendent  of Police, Surguja, on June  24,  1962.<br \/>\nAfter  holding\tthe  enquiry as prescribed  by\tthe  Central<br \/>\nProvinces  and Bihar Police Regulations, the  Superintendent<br \/>\nof  Police submitted his report to the Inspector-General  of<br \/>\nPolice,\t Madhya Pradesh through Deputy Inspector-General  of<br \/>\nPolice,\t Raipur.  On the basis of the enquiry held  by\thim,\n<\/p>\n<p>-the Superintendent of Police concluded that the  respondent<br \/>\nwas  guilty  of\t the  charges  levelled\t against  him.\t  He<br \/>\nrecommended  his dismissal.  After receiving the  report  of<br \/>\nthe  Superintendent of Police, the Inspector General sent  a<br \/>\ncopy  of the same to the respondent and called upon  him  to<br \/>\nshow cause why he should not be dismissed from service.\t The<br \/>\nrespondent submitted his explanation.  After considering the<br \/>\nsame,\tthe  Inspector\tGeneral\t of  Police  dismissed\t the<br \/>\nrespondent   from  service  on\tNovember  30,\t1963.\t The<br \/>\nrespondent&#8217;s  appeal  to the Government\t against  the  order<br \/>\ndismissing  him\t was rejected.\t Thereafter  the  respondent<br \/>\nmoved  the High Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution  to<br \/>\nquash  the  order  dismissing  him  by\tissuing\t a  writ  of<br \/>\ncertiorari.   The dismissal order was challenged on  various<br \/>\ngrounds.   The High Court rejected all but one of them.\t  It<br \/>\ncame  to the conclusion that the Superintendent\t of  Police,<br \/>\nSurguja was not competent to initiate or conduct the enquiry<br \/>\nheld against the respondent as he had been appointed by\t the<br \/>\nInspector-General  of Police.  It was of the view  that\t the<br \/>\nenquiry\t in  the case was without the authority of  law\t and<br \/>\nagainst\t the,  mandate of Art. 3 1 1 ( 1 ).  It\t accordingly<br \/>\nallowed\t the  writ  petition and  quashed  the\timpugn%-,,-&#8216;<br \/>\norder.\tThe Superintendent of Police, Surg ja initiated\t and<br \/>\nconducted the enquiry against the respondent on the basis of<br \/>\nRegulations  228 and 229 of the Central Provinces and  Bihar<br \/>\nPolice Regulations.  These &#8216;Regulations are evidently framed<br \/>\non  the\t basis\tof S. 241 of the Government  of\t India\tAct,<br \/>\n1935,a\tProvision which. permitted the State Governments  to<br \/>\nmake  rules  regulating the recruitment\t and  conditions  of<br \/>\nservice\t of persons appointed to State service.\t  Regulation<br \/>\n228 says :\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;In  every  case of dismissal, reduction in rank,  grade  or<br \/>\npay, or withholding of increment for, a period in excess  of<br \/>\none  year,  a  formal proceeding must be  recorded,  by\t the<br \/>\nDistrict  Superintendent  in the  prescribed  form,  setting<br \/>\nforth\n<\/p>\n<p>(a)  the charge;\n<\/p>\n<p>(b)  the evidence on which the charge is based;\n<\/p>\n<p>(c)  the defence of the, accused;\n<\/p>\n<p>(d)  the statements of his witnesses (if any).\n<\/p>\n<p>(e) the\t finding of the District Superintendent,  with\tthe<br \/>\nreasons on which it is based;\n<\/p>\n<p>(f)  the  District  Superintendent&#8217;s  final  order  or\t re-<br \/>\ncommendation, as the case -may be.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>Regulation  229 prescribes that in cases where the  District<br \/>\nSuperintendent\tis not empowered to pass a final  order,  he<br \/>\nshould\tforward his proposals for the dismissal, removal  or<br \/>\ncompulsory retirement of an officer of and above the rank of<br \/>\nSub-Inspector  to the proper authority through the  District<br \/>\nMagistrate, except in cases where an officer is not  serving<br \/>\nin a district.\n<\/p>\n<p>There  is no dispute that the Superintendent of\t Police\t had<br \/>\ncomplied  with the requirements of Regs. 228 and  229.\t The<br \/>\nquestion for consideration is whether the power conferred on<br \/>\nthe  Superintendent  of Police under Regs. 228\tand  229  is<br \/>\nultra vires Art. 3 11(1).\n<\/p>\n<p>Art.   311(1)  provides that no person who is  a  member  of<br \/>\nCivil  Service\tof the Union or of an All India\t Service  or<br \/>\nCivil Service of a State or holds civil post under the Union<br \/>\nor  State  shall  be dismissed or removed  by  an  authority<br \/>\nsubordinate to that by which he was appointed.\tThis Article<br \/>\ndoes not in terms require that the authority empowered under<br \/>\nthat  provision\t to dismiss or remove  an  official,  should<br \/>\nitself\tinitiate  or  conduct  the  enquiry  preceding\t the<br \/>\ndismissal  or  removal\tof the officer\tor  even  that\tthat<br \/>\nenquiry\t should\t be done at its instance.   The\t only  right<br \/>\nguaranteed to a civil servant tinder that provision is\tthat<br \/>\nhe  shall  not\tbe  dismissed or  removed  by  an  authority<br \/>\nsubordinate  to that by which he was appointed.\t But  it  is<br \/>\nsaid  on  behalf  of  the  respondent  that  that  guarantee<br \/>\ninclude,,  within  itself the guarantee\t that  the  relevant<br \/>\n&#8216;disciplinary enquiry should be initiated and con-\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">305<\/span><\/p>\n<p>ducted\tby  the authorities mentioned in the  Article.\t The<br \/>\nHigh Court has accepted this contention.  We have now to see<br \/>\nwhether the view taken by the High Court is correct.<br \/>\nArt.  310(l) of the Constitution declares that every  person<br \/>\nwho  is\t a member of civil service of a State or  holds\t any<br \/>\ncivil  post in a State holds office during the\tpleasure  of<br \/>\nthe Governor of a State.  But the pleasure doctrine embodied<br \/>\ntherein\t  is  subject  to  the\tother  provisions   in\t the<br \/>\nConstitution.  Two, other Articles in the Constitution which<br \/>\ncut down the width of the power given under Art. 310(l)\t are<br \/>\nArts.  &#8216;309 and 311.  Art. 309 provides that subject to\t the<br \/>\nprovisions  of\tthe Constitution, Acts\tof  the\t appropriate<br \/>\nLegislature may regulate the recruitment, and conditions  of<br \/>\nservice\t of persons appointed, to public services and  posts<br \/>\nin connection with the affairs of the Union or of any State.<br \/>\nProviso to that Article says :\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Provided  that it shall be competent for the  President  or<br \/>\nsuch  person  as he may direct in the case of  services\t and<br \/>\nposts  in collection with the affairs of the Union, and\t for<br \/>\nthe  Governor of a State or such person as he may direct  in<br \/>\nthe  case  of  services and posts  in  connection  with\t the<br \/>\naffairs\t  of  the  State  to  make  rules   regulating\t the<br \/>\nrecruitment,  and  the\tconditions  of\tservice\t of  persons<br \/>\nappointed,  to\tsuch services and posts until  provision  in<br \/>\nthat  behalf is made by or under an Act of  the\t appropriate<br \/>\nLegislature under this article, and any rules so made  shall<br \/>\nhave effect subject to the provisions of any such Act.&#8221;<br \/>\nOne  of the powers conferred under this proviso is  to\tmake<br \/>\nrules  regulating  the\tconditions  of\tservice\t of  persons<br \/>\nappointed to civil services of the Union or the State as the<br \/>\ncase  may be.  The expression &#8220;conditions of service&#8221; is  an<br \/>\nexpression  of\twide import.  As pointed by this  Court\t in,<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/1084416\/\">Pradyat\t Kumar\tBose  v. The Hon&#8217;ble the  Chief\t Justice  of<br \/>\nCalcutta  High Court<\/a> (1), the dismissal of an official is  a<br \/>\nmatter\twhich falls within &#8220;conditions of service of  public<br \/>\nservants.   The Judicial Committee of the Privy\t Council  in<br \/>\nNorth West Frontier Province v. Suraj Narain Anand (2)\ttook<br \/>\nthe view that a right of dismissal is a condition of service<br \/>\nwithin\tthe  meaning  of  the words  under  s.\t243  of\t the<br \/>\nGovernment of India Act, 1935.\n<\/p>\n<p>Lord Thankerton speaking for the Board observed therein<br \/>\n&#8220;apart\tfrom consideration whether the context\tindicates  a<br \/>\nspecial\t  significance\tto  the\t expression  conditions\t  of<br \/>\nservice?  their Lordships are unable in the absence  of\t any<br \/>\nsuch special significance, to regard provisions<br \/>\n(1) [1955] 2 S.C.R. 1331.\n<\/p>\n<p>(2) [1948] L.R. 75 I.A. 343.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">306<\/span><\/p>\n<p>which  prescribe the circumstances under which the  employer<br \/>\nis to be entitled to terminate the service as otherwise than<br \/>\nconditions  of\tthe service, whether  these  provisions\t are<br \/>\ncontractual  or\t statutory; they are therefore\tof   opinion<br \/>\nthat  the  natural meaning of the expression  would  include<br \/>\nsuch provisions.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>In  P. Balakataiali v. 7he Union of India and  Ors.(1)\tthis<br \/>\nCourt  proceeded on the basis that a rule providing for\t the<br \/>\ntermination of the service of a railway official can be made<br \/>\nin exercise of the powers conferred on the Government by ss.<br \/>\n241(2), 247 and 263(3) of the Government of India Act, 1935.<br \/>\nThe  expression\t &#8216;conditions  of service&#8217;  means  all  those<br \/>\nconditions which regulate the holding of a post by a  person<br \/>\nright  from the time of his appointment till his  retirement<br \/>\nand even beyond it in matters like pension etc.<br \/>\nBut  for the incorporation of Art. 311 in  the\tConstitution<br \/>\neven  in  respect of matters provided therein,\trules  could<br \/>\nhave been framed under Art. 309.  The provisions in Art. 311<br \/>\nconfer\tadditional rights on the civil servants.   Hence  we<br \/>\nare unable to agree, with the High Court that the  guarantee<br \/>\ngiven  under  Art. 311(l) includes within itself  a  further<br \/>\nguarantee  that\t the disciplinary proceedings  resulting  in<br \/>\ndismissal  or  removal\tof a civil servant  should  also  be<br \/>\ninitiated and conducted by the authorities mentioned in that<br \/>\nArticle.\n<\/p>\n<p>In  the result this appeal is allowed, the judgment  of\t the<br \/>\nHigh Court is set aside and the writ petition dismissed.  In<br \/>\nthe circumstances of the case we make no order as to costs-.\n<\/p>\n<pre>Y.P.\t\t       Appeal allowed.\n(1) [1958] S.C.R. 1052.\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">307<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India State Of Madhya Pradesh &amp; Ors vs Shardul Singh on 2 December, 1959 PETITIONER: STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH &amp; ORS. Vs. RESPONDENT: SHARDUL SINGH DATE OF JUDGMENT: 02\/12\/1959 BENCH: ACT: Constitution of India, Art. 311(1) &#8211;If the Authority empowered to dismiss should itself initiate or conduct the enquiry-Article 309, proviso, -&#8220;Conditions [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-243424","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>State Of Madhya Pradesh &amp; Ors vs Shardul Singh on 2 December, 1959 - 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\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"State Of Madhya Pradesh &amp; Ors vs Shardul Singh on 2 December, 1959 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959\" \/>\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=\"1959-12-01T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-26T05:28:56+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"10 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"State Of Madhya Pradesh &amp; Ors vs Shardul Singh on 2 December, 1959\",\"datePublished\":\"1959-12-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-26T05:28:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959\"},\"wordCount\":1528,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959\",\"name\":\"State Of Madhya Pradesh &amp; Ors vs Shardul Singh on 2 December, 1959 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1959-12-01T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-26T05:28:56+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"State Of Madhya Pradesh &amp; Ors vs Shardul Singh on 2 December, 1959\"}]},{\"@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":"State Of Madhya Pradesh &amp; Ors vs Shardul Singh on 2 December, 1959 - 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\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"State Of Madhya Pradesh &amp; Ors vs Shardul Singh on 2 December, 1959 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1959-12-01T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-26T05:28:56+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"10 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"State Of Madhya Pradesh &amp; Ors vs Shardul Singh on 2 December, 1959","datePublished":"1959-12-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-26T05:28:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959"},"wordCount":1528,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959","name":"State Of Madhya Pradesh &amp; Ors vs Shardul Singh on 2 December, 1959 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1959-12-01T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-26T05:28:56+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/state-of-madhya-pradesh-ors-vs-shardul-singh-on-2-december-1959#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"State Of Madhya Pradesh &amp; Ors vs Shardul Singh on 2 December, 1959"}]},{"@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\/243424","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=243424"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/243424\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=243424"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=243424"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=243424"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}