{"id":244066,"date":"1974-12-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1974-12-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974"},"modified":"2017-01-17T08:01:09","modified_gmt":"2017-01-17T02:31:09","slug":"sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974","title":{"rendered":"Sarwan Singh Etc. Etc vs The State Of Punjab &amp; Ors. Etc on 12 December, 1974"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sarwan Singh Etc. Etc vs The State Of Punjab &amp; Ors. Etc on 12 December, 1974<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1975 AIR  394, \t\t  1975 SCR  (2)1007<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: P Goswami<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Goswami, P.K.<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nSARWAN SINGH ETC.  ETC.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE STATE OF PUNJAB &amp; ORS.  ETC.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT12\/12\/1974\n\nBENCH:\nGOSWAMI, P.K.\nBENCH:\nGOSWAMI, P.K.\nRAY, A.N. (CJ)\nREDDY, P. JAGANMOHAN\nKHANNA, HANS RAJ\n\nCITATION:\n 1975 AIR  394\t\t  1975 SCR  (2)1007\n 1975 SCC  (1) 284\n\n\nACT:\nPunjab\tTown Improvement Act,  1922-S.\t59(a)-Constitutional\nvalidity  of--ultra vires Art. 14-Whether the  Tribunal\t has\nadopted\t any  unreasonable  principle  in  determining\t the\ncompensation.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe  appellants' land within the municipality  was  acquired\nfor  a\tdevelopment  scheme of\tthe  Improvement  Trust.   A\nnotification   was  issued  under  s.  36  of  Punjab\tTown\nImprovement  Act. 1922.\t Aggrieved by the award of the\tLand\nAcquisition  Collector\tof  the Improvement  Trust  and\t the\ndecision  of the Tribunal constituted under the\t Improvement\nAct the appellants challenged the order of the Tribunal in a\nwrit petition, which was dismissed by the High Court.\nOn  appeal to this Court it was contended (i) that s.  59(a)\nof  the\t Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 was\tultra  vires\nArt. 14 of the Constitution and (ii) that the Tribunal\ttook\nan absolutely wrong principle into consideration in    determining\nthe compensation of the lands acquired.\nDismissing the appeals,\nHELD : (1) (a) Acquisition of land under the Improvement Act\nadmits of a reasonable basis of classification and s.  59(a)\nis not violative of Art. 14 of\t   the Constitution.   There\ncan  be\t no  complaint\tthat there is  no  guideline  in  he\nImprovement  Act  in  determining  the,\t compensation  since\nreferentially  the Principles under the Acquisition Act\t had\nbeen adopted and such other principles ire also added as may\nbe  appropriate in the nature of things.  The object of\t the\nlmprovement  Act  being improvement of the  towns  covers  a\nspecific,  though wide, field.\tUnder' the  Improvement\t Act\nthere  is  a statutory obligation upon the Trusts  to  frame\nappropriate  schemes in which case, the matter is likely  to\ntake  air  and\tthe public as well as the  land\t owners\t may\nbenefit\t materially from knowledge of acquisition  prior  to\nthe actual notification under s. 36 as against a preliminary\nnotification  under s. 4 of the Land Acquisition  Act  which\nappears\t  in  the  gazette  all\t of  a\t sudden.    Although\nacquisition under the Acquisition Act is also generally\t for\npublic\tpurpose the character of the acquisition  under\t the\nImprovement  Act  is  different and  the  difference  has  a\ndefinite and intimate nexus with the principal object of the\nAct,  namely. improvement of towns.  No valid exception\t can\nbe  taken  to  the  adoption of\t the  Acquisition  Act\twith\nmodifications  to suit the requirements of  the\t Improvement\nAct, and in particular, to the deletion of the provisions of\nappeal under s.\t    54 of the Acquisition Adt. [1011 C; 1010\nE-H]\n(b)  Denial  of\t the  right of appeal  available  under\t the\nAcquisition  Act does not make s. 59(a) ultra vires Art.  14\nof  the Constitution.  The legislature, by making the  order\nof the Tribunal final under s. 59(d) seeks to avoid delay in\nthe  course  of\t litigation to defeat  the  purpose  of\t the\nscheme,,  framed  under\t the  Act.  Right  of  appeal  is  a\ncreature  of the statute and mere denial or taking  away  of\nsuch  a\t right\tunder the law cannot  be  considered  as  an\ninfringement of a person's fundamental right. [1011 D]\n(2)The Tribunal has not adopted any unreasonable  principles\nin  ignoring the sales that have taken place after the\tdate\nof  notification under s. 36.  The notification under s.  36\nbeing of September 16, 1960. that is the material date which\nshould be reckoned for purposes of determining compensation.\nThe  sale  that takes place after the date  of\tnotification\nunder  s.  36, as distinct from one under s. 4 of  the\tLand\nAcquisition  Act, cannot be taken as a reasonable guide\t for\ndetermination of compensation under s. 23 of the Acquisition\nAct as amended by the Improvement Act. [ 1012 B-C]\n10 08\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>CIVIL  APPELLATE    JURISDICTION : Civil Appeals Nos. 345  &amp;<br \/>\n347 to 349 of 1971.\n<\/p>\n<p>Appeals\t from the judgment and decree dated the February  5,<br \/>\n1970  of  the  Punjab  &amp; Haryana  High\tCourt,in  C.W.\tNos.<br \/>\n3627\/68, 273, 274 and 1380 of 1969.\n<\/p>\n<p>B.   Sen, and R. L. Kohli, for the appellants.<br \/>\nB.   P.\t Singh for respondents No.3 (In\t C.A.No.347\/71)\t and<br \/>\nrespondent No. 2 (In C.A. No. 345-348-349\/71).<br \/>\nV C. Mahajan (In C.A. No. 245\/71) Harbans Singh (In C.A\t No.<br \/>\n347\/71) O. P. Sharma and N..K. Agarwala (In C.A. No.  345\/71<br \/>\nfor respondent No. 1 (In all the appeals.)<br \/>\nThe Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\nGOSWAMI, J.&#8211;The questions that are raised in these  appeals<br \/>\nby certificate by Mr. B. Sen on behalf of the appellants are<br \/>\nthese :-\n<\/p>\n<p>(1)  Section 59(a) of the Punjab Town Improvement Act,\t1222<br \/>\n(Punjab\t Act  4 of 1922) is ultra vires article\t 14  of\t the<br \/>\nConstitution.\n<\/p>\n<p>(2)  The  Tribunal  took absolutely a wrong  principle\tinto<br \/>\nconsideration  in determining the compensation of the  lands<br \/>\nacquired.\n<\/p>\n<p>(3)  The  Tribunal  has not applied its own rule as  to\t the<br \/>\nrate of compensation uniformly to the different appellants.<br \/>\nThe  facts of one appeal (Civil Appeal No. 435 of 1971)\t may<br \/>\nbe  sufficient\tfor our purpose.  Land measuring  165  acres<br \/>\nincluding the appellant&#8217;s land measuring 6 bighas, 4  biswas<br \/>\nand 17 biswasi, comprised in various khasra numbers situated<br \/>\nin  the\t revenue estate of Piru Banda within  the  municipal<br \/>\nlimits\tof Ludhiana Municipal Committee, was acquired for  a<br \/>\ndevelopment   scheme  of  the  Ludhiana\t Improvement   Trust<br \/>\n(hereinafter   called  the  Trust)  styled  as\tModel\tTown<br \/>\nExtension  Scheme No.1. A notification under section  36  of<br \/>\nthe  Punjab  Town Improvement Act  (hereinafter\t called\t the<br \/>\nImprovement  Act),  which is analogous to section 4  of\t the<br \/>\nLand   Acquisition   Act,  1894\t (hereinafter\tcalled\t the<br \/>\nAcquisition  Act) was published on September 16, 1960.\t The<br \/>\npresent appeal relates to the acquisition of the appellant&#8217;s<br \/>\nland  in  village  Piru Banda only.   The  Land\t Acquisition<br \/>\nCollector,  Improvement Trust, Ludhiana, made his  award  on<br \/>\nMarch 31, 1964, with regard to the said land.  Aggrieved  by<br \/>\nthe  said  award the appellant and other  land\towners\tmade<br \/>\nseparate  applications under section 18 of  the\t Acquisition<br \/>\nAct for making a reference to the Tribunal constituted under<br \/>\nthe  Improvement  Act (hereinafter respondent No.  2).\t The<br \/>\ncases  were  then  referred to\tthe  Tribunal.\t The  second<br \/>\nrespondent took up all the references together and delivered<br \/>\na  common Judgment on October 16, 1968.\t The  Collector\t had<br \/>\nearlier classified the land acquired under three categories,<br \/>\nnamely, belt &#8216;A&#8217;, &#8216;B&#8217; and &#8216;C&#8217; fixing the price for valuation<br \/>\nat the rate of Rs. 60\/- Rs. 40\/- and Rs. 20,\/-<br \/>\n100 9<br \/>\nper square yard respectively.  The, Tribunal in the case  of<br \/>\nthe  appellant\tin  Civil  Appeal  No.\t345  of\t 1971  under<br \/>\ndiscussion, modified the award to the extent that the price<br \/>\nof  the land comprised in belt &#8216;C&#8217; was raised from Rs.\t20\/-<br \/>\nto  Rs.\t 30\/- per square yard while the price for  the\tarea<br \/>\ncovered\t by belt &#8216;B&#8217; was upheld.  The  appellant  challenged<br \/>\nthe  order  of the Tribunal by a writ petition in  the\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt  of Punjab and Haryana.  The High Court  following  an<br \/>\nearlier\t decision  dismissed the writ  petition.   The\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt,\thowever,  granted a certificate to  appeal  to\tthis<br \/>\nCourt under article 133(1) (a) of the Constitution.<br \/>\nWith  regard to the first point, it is submitted that  there<br \/>\nis   no\t guideline  in\tthe  Improvement  Act\titself\t for<br \/>\ndetermining  compensation.  However, it is admitted that  by<br \/>\nsection\t 59  of the Improvement Act the Acquisition  Act  is<br \/>\nmade  applicable with certain modifications for the  purpose<br \/>\nof acquiring land for the Trust.  It is pointed out that  by<br \/>\nsection\t 59(a)\tof the Improvement Act the Tribunal  is\t not<br \/>\ndeemed\tto be the court under the Acquisition &#8216; Act for\t the<br \/>\npurpose\t of section 54 of the latter Act and  under  section<br \/>\n59(d) the award of the Tribunal is deemed to be the award of<br \/>\nthe court under the Acquisition Act and shall also be final.<br \/>\nIt  is, therefore, contended that the two rights of  appeal,<br \/>\nwhich are available under section 54 of the Acquisition Act,<br \/>\nare denied when land is acquired under the Improvement\tAct.<br \/>\nRight of appeal being denied in cases of acquisition by\t the<br \/>\nImprovement  Trust, section 59(a) is ultra vires article  14<br \/>\nof the Constitution.  It is submitted that the land acquired<br \/>\nfor  the Trust is as much for public purpose as\t acquisition<br \/>\nof  the same for public purpose under the  Acquisition\tAct.<br \/>\nThere  is, according to counsel a clear discrimination\twhen<br \/>\nland is chosen to be acquired under the Improvement Act when<br \/>\nit  could have been done under the Acquisition Act.   It  is<br \/>\nsubmitted  that\t there\tis, therefore,\tan  infringement  of<br \/>\nfundamental right of the appellants guaranteed under article<br \/>\n14 of the Constitution in denying the right of appeal.<br \/>\nThe Improvement Act was passed in the year 1922.  The state-<br \/>\nment  of objects and reasons shows that &#8220;the object  of\t the<br \/>\nAct  is to make provision for the improvement and  expansion<br \/>\nof  towns, by the creation of Trusts vested  with  statutory<br \/>\npowers\tto  enable them to acquire land and carry  out\tsuch<br \/>\nimprovements  and  extensions as may  be  found\t requisite&#8221;.<br \/>\nSection 3 of the Improvement Act provides for creation(\t and<br \/>\nincorporation  of  trusts.  Section 22 to 44 in\t Chapter  IV<br \/>\nmake  detailed provisions for schemes under the\t Improvement<br \/>\nAct.   By section 36 when a scheme under this Act  has\tbeen<br \/>\nframed,\t the  Trust shall prepare a notice  stating  various<br \/>\nparticulars  mentioned therein and publish the\tname.\tThis<br \/>\nsection\t is  a substitute for section 4 of  the\t Acquisition<br \/>\nAct.   Section, 42 provides for notification of sanction  of<br \/>\nevery  scheme  and under sub-section (2) thereof  the  noti-<br \/>\nfication  under\t sub-section (1) in respect  of\t any  scheme<br \/>\nshall  be conclusive evidence that the scheme has been\tduly<br \/>\nframed\tand sanctioned.\t The section again is  a  substitute<br \/>\nfor section 6 of the Acquisition Act. Chapter V details\t the<br \/>\npowers\tand  duties of the Trusts where a  scheme  has\tbeen<br \/>\nsanctioned.   Section  59 of which clause  (a)\tis  impugned<br \/>\nreads as under :-\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">1010<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t      &#8220;For  the purpose of acquiring land under\t the<br \/>\n\t      Land<br \/>\n\t      Acquisition  Act,\t 1894 (1 of 1894),  for\t the<br \/>\n\t      trust-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      (a)   the\t Tribunal  shall  (except  for\t the<br \/>\n\t      purposes\tof  section 54 of the said  Act)  be<br \/>\n\t      deemed  to be the Court, and the President  of<br \/>\n\t      the Tribunal shall be deemed to be the  Judge,<br \/>\n\t      under the said Act;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      (b)   the\t said  Act shall be subject  to\t the<br \/>\n\t      further\tmodifications\tindicated   in\t the<br \/>\n\t      Schedule to this Act;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      (c)\tx\t\t x\t\t   x<br \/>\n\t      x\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>\t      (d)   the\t ward of a Tribunal shall be  deemed<br \/>\n\t      to  be the award of the Court under  the\tLand<br \/>\n\t      Acquisition Act, 1894, (1 of 1894), and  shall<br \/>\n\t      be final&#8221;.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Under  section 60 the Tribunal shall consist of a  President<br \/>\nand  two  assessors  land the President shall  be  a  person<br \/>\nqualified  for appointment as a Judge of the High  Court  of<br \/>\nPunjab\tand  Haryana.\tIn  the\t Schedule  attached  to\t the<br \/>\nImprovement  Act, further modifications in  the\t Acquisition<br \/>\nAct have been introduced as provided for in section 59. Para<br \/>\n10  of the Schedule provides for amendment of section 23  of<br \/>\nthe  Acquisition  Act  and  prescribes,\t inter\talia,\tsome<br \/>\nsupplemental principles for determining the market value  of<br \/>\nthe  land according to use to which the land was put at\t the<br \/>\nmaterial date.\n<\/p>\n<p>It  is\tclear  there can be no complaint that  there  is  no<br \/>\nguideline   in\t the   Improvement   Act   for\t determining<br \/>\ncompensation  since referentially the principles  under\t the<br \/>\nAcquisition Act have been adopted and such other  principles<br \/>\nare  also  added  as may be appropriate\t in  the  nature  of<br \/>\nthings.\t Land acquired for the Trusts under the\t Improvement<br \/>\nAct, as will be shown below, can be reasonably placed  under<br \/>\na well-defined category in view of the scheme underlying the<br \/>\ndetailed  provisions  in the said Act.\tIt is  well  settled<br \/>\nthat  article 14 does not abhor a reasonable  classification<br \/>\nprovided  the  basis of the classification  has\t a  rational<br \/>\nrelation to the object to be achieved by the Act.  Here\t the<br \/>\nobject of the Improvement Act being improvement of the towns<br \/>\ncovers a specific, though a wide, field as may be  evidenced<br \/>\nby   the   elaborate   provisions   for\t  preparation\t and<br \/>\nimplementation\tof schemes by the Trust under the said\tAct.<br \/>\nLeaving\t aside the case of companies, which are\t dealt\twith<br \/>\nunder different provisions, the Government under the  Acqui-<br \/>\nsition\tAct  acquires land for public purposes\twithout\t the<br \/>\npreliminary  requirements of any schemes for utilisation  of<br \/>\nthe   particular  land.\t  On  the  other  hand,\t under\t the<br \/>\nImprovement  Act  there is a statutory obligation  upon\t the<br \/>\ntrusts first to frame appropriate schemes in which case\t the<br \/>\nmatter\tis likely to take air and the public as well as\t the<br \/>\nland  owners  may  benefit  materially\tfrom  knowledge\t  of<br \/>\nacquisition  prior to the actual notification under  section<br \/>\n36 as against a preliminary notification under section 4  of<br \/>\nthe  Acquisition Act which appears in the gazette a11  of  a<br \/>\nsudden.\t This pre-acquisition difference of proccdure is<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">1011<\/span><br \/>\nsignificant  as\t the  material\tdate  for  determination  of<br \/>\ncompensation  ill  either  case is the\tpublication  of\t the<br \/>\nnotification  under section 36 and section  4  respectively.<br \/>\nThis  fact  is of great relevance as the real  grievance  in<br \/>\nthese  appeals is against the denial of a right\t of  appeal<br \/>\nagainst\t the  decision of the Tribunal appertaining  to\t the<br \/>\ndomain\tof  possibility of enhancement\tof  compensation  in<br \/>\nappeals.  Although acquisition under the Acquisition Act  is<br \/>\nalso  generally\t for public purpose, the  character  of\t the<br \/>\nacquisition  under the Improvement Act is different and\t the<br \/>\ndifference  has\t a  definite and  intimate  nexus  with\t the<br \/>\nprincipal  object of the Act, namely, improvement  of  towns<br \/>\nwhich  is  the dominant purpose.  No  valid  exception\tcan,<br \/>\ntherefore,  be\ttaken to adoptation of the  Acquisition\t Act<br \/>\nwith   modifications  to  suit\tthe  requirements   of\t the<br \/>\nImprovement  Act  and in particular to the deletion  of\t the<br \/>\nprovisions  of appeal under section 54 of  the\tAcquisition<br \/>\nAct.   Acquisition of land under the Improvement Act  admits<br \/>\nof  a reasonable basis of classification and  section  59(a)<br \/>\nis,   therefore,  not  violative  of  article  14  of the<br \/>\nConstitution.\n<\/p>\n<p>Again denial of the right of appeal available in the case of<br \/>\nacquisition under the Acquisition Act does not make  section<br \/>\n59  (a)\t ultra vires article 14 of  the\t Constitution.\t The<br \/>\nImprovement  Act constitutes a Tribunal with two  assessor,,<br \/>\nunlike\tin  the\t Acquisition  Act.   The  President  of\t the<br \/>\nTribunal  shall be a person qualified for appointment  as  a<br \/>\nJudge of the High Court.  One of the assessors is  appointed<br \/>\nbY the State Government and the Other assessor is  appointed<br \/>\nby  the Municipal Committee and on failure to do so  by\t the<br \/>\nCommittee,  by\tthe State Government.\tThe  legislature  by<br \/>\nmaking\tthe order of the Tribunal final under section  59(d)<br \/>\nseeks  to avoid delay in the course of litigation to  defeat<br \/>\nthe  purpose of the schemes framed udder the Act.  Right  of<br \/>\nappeal\tis  a  creature of the statute and  mere  denial  or<br \/>\ntaking\taway  of  such\ta right\t under\tthe  law  cannot  be<br \/>\nconsidered  as\tan infringement of  a  person&#8217;s\t fundamental<br \/>\nright.\tThe first submission of the learned counsel  cannot,<br \/>\ntherefore, be accepted.\n<\/p>\n<p>With  regard to the second submission, Mr. Sen submits\tthat<br \/>\nthe Tribunal has taken into account only the sale deeds that<br \/>\nhave been produced in, the cases executed prior to the\tdate<br \/>\nof the notification under section 36, namely, September\t 16,<br \/>\n1960.\t&#8216;,According to counsel the Tribunal also  took\tinto<br \/>\naccount\t sale deeds executed within five years\tbefore\tthat<br \/>\ndate  but refused to take into consideration the sale  deeds<br \/>\nexecuted  after the said date of notification.\t This,\tsays<br \/>\nthe  learned  counsel, is absolutely unreasonable and  is  a<br \/>\nwrong\tprinciple   which  the\tTribunal  has\tadopted\t  in<br \/>\ndetermining  compensation under the Act.  We are  unable  to<br \/>\naccept this submission.\t Under section 23 of the Acquisation<br \/>\nAct,  as  amended  in  1923, the  court\t has  to  take\tinto<br \/>\nconsideration  the market value of the land at the  date  of<br \/>\npublication of the notification under section 4, sub-section<br \/>\n(1)  of\t that  Act.  Under para 10 of the  Schedule  to\t the<br \/>\nImprovement   Act, the court has to take into  consideration<br \/>\nunder section 23)1) of the Acquisition Act the market  value<br \/>\nof  the\t land  at  the\tdate  of  the  publication  of\t the<br \/>\nnotification under section 36 of the Improvement Act, in The<br \/>\npresent case, which is not one of acquisition under  section<br \/>\n32  of the Improvement Act.  The notification under  section<br \/>\n36 in the pre-\n<\/p>\n<p>1 0 12<br \/>\nsent case being of September 16, 1960, that is the  material<br \/>\ndate  which should be reckoned for purposes  of\t determining<br \/>\ncompensation.  It is well-known that once a notification for<br \/>\nacquisition   is   published  people  start   upon   various<br \/>\nspeculations and the future potentiality of the land becomes<br \/>\nvery  important and that affects the price of the land\tsold<br \/>\nin  the area sought to be acquired or in close proximity  to<br \/>\nit  and\t this  rise  in\t potential  value  has\ta   definite<br \/>\nconnection  with  the  issuance\t of  the  notification\t for<br \/>\nacquisition  of the land.  The sale that takes\tplace  after<br \/>\nthe  date  of a notification under section 36,\tas  distinct<br \/>\nfrom  one under section 4 of the Acquisition Act, cannot  be<br \/>\ntaken\tas   a\treasonable  guide   for\t  determination\t  of<br \/>\ncompensation  under  section 23 of the Acquisition  Act as<br \/>\namended\t  by  the  Improvement\tAct.   The   Tribunal\thas,<br \/>\ntherefore,  not\t adopted  any  unreasonable  principles\t  in<br \/>\nignoring  the sales that have taken place after the date  of<br \/>\nnotification under section 36.\tThe second submission of the<br \/>\nlearned counsel also fails.\n<\/p>\n<p>With  regard  to  the  third  and  last\t submission  of\t the<br \/>\nappellants  we are unable to interfere with the\t quantum  of<br \/>\ncompensation   when   no  case\tof   gross   injustice\t and<br \/>\ndiscrimination\t has  been  made  out  on  the\t facts\t and<br \/>\ncircumstances taken into account by the Tribunal.<br \/>\nIn  the result all the appeals are dismissed but we make  no<br \/>\norder as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>P.B.R.\t\t\tAppeals dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>L346SupCI\/74 -2500 &#8211; 29-10-75- GIPF.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">1<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Sarwan Singh Etc. Etc vs The State Of Punjab &amp; Ors. Etc on 12 December, 1974 Equivalent citations: 1975 AIR 394, 1975 SCR (2)1007 Author: P Goswami Bench: Goswami, P.K. PETITIONER: SARWAN SINGH ETC. ETC. Vs. RESPONDENT: THE STATE OF PUNJAB &amp; ORS. ETC. DATE OF JUDGMENT12\/12\/1974 BENCH: GOSWAMI, P.K. BENCH: [&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-244066","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>Sarwan Singh Etc. Etc vs The State Of Punjab &amp; Ors. Etc on 12 December, 1974 - 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\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sarwan Singh Etc. Etc vs The State Of Punjab &amp; Ors. Etc on 12 December, 1974 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974\" \/>\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=\"1974-12-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-17T02:31:09+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=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sarwan Singh Etc. Etc vs The State Of Punjab &amp; Ors. Etc on 12 December, 1974\",\"datePublished\":\"1974-12-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-17T02:31:09+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974\"},\"wordCount\":2266,\"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\\\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974\",\"name\":\"Sarwan Singh Etc. Etc vs The State Of Punjab &amp; Ors. Etc on 12 December, 1974 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1974-12-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-17T02:31:09+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sarwan Singh Etc. Etc vs The State Of Punjab &amp; Ors. Etc on 12 December, 1974\"}]},{\"@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":"Sarwan Singh Etc. Etc vs The State Of Punjab &amp; Ors. Etc on 12 December, 1974 - 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\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sarwan Singh Etc. Etc vs The State Of Punjab &amp; Ors. Etc on 12 December, 1974 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1974-12-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-17T02:31:09+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":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sarwan Singh Etc. Etc vs The State Of Punjab &amp; Ors. Etc on 12 December, 1974","datePublished":"1974-12-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-17T02:31:09+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974"},"wordCount":2266,"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\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974","name":"Sarwan Singh Etc. Etc vs The State Of Punjab &amp; Ors. Etc on 12 December, 1974 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1974-12-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-17T02:31:09+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sarwan-singh-etc-etc-vs-the-state-of-punjab-ors-etc-on-12-december-1974#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sarwan Singh Etc. Etc vs The State Of Punjab &amp; Ors. Etc on 12 December, 1974"}]},{"@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\/244066","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=244066"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/244066\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=244066"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=244066"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=244066"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}