{"id":250804,"date":"1997-02-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1997-02-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997"},"modified":"2019-01-11T15:45:43","modified_gmt":"2019-01-11T10:15:43","slug":"union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997","title":{"rendered":"Union Of India & Anr vs Sher Singh & Ors on 7 February, 1997"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Union Of India & Anr vs Sher Singh & Ors on 7 February, 1997<\/div>\n
Bench: K. Ramaswamy, S. Saghir Ahmad<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nUNION OF INDIA & ANR.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSHER SINGH & ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t07\/02\/1997\n\nBENCH:\nK. RAMASWAMY, S. SAGHIR AHMAD\n\n\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
\t\t\t O R D E R
\n     This appeal, by special leave, arises from the judgment
\nof the\tdivision Bench\tof the\tHigh court of Delhi, made on
\nMay 30, 1991 in R.F.A. NO.167\/86.\n<\/p>\n
     The admitted  facts are that notification under Section
\n4(1)  of  the  land  Acquisition  Act<\/a>,\t1864  was  published
\nacquiring certain  lands for  public purpose.  Therein rival
\nclaims came  to be  made by  Gaon  Sabha,  Tekhand  and\t the
\nrespondents claiming  title to\tthe compensation.  Since the
\nLand Acquisition  officer\/collector was unable to decide the
\ntitle to receive the compensation on reference under section
\n30<\/a> of  the Act, the District court by award and decree dated
\nFebruary 22,  1986 held\t that the  land\t in  question  stood
\nvested in  the Gaon  Sabha under Section 7<\/a> read with Section
\n154 of\tthe Delhi  Land Reforms\t Act (for short, the `Act’).
\nTherefore, it  is entitled  to the  compensation of the land
\nacquired by  the Union of India. Dissatisfied therewith, the
\nrespondents filed  the above  appeal. The  High Court in the
\nimpugned judgment  has held  that “Gair\t Mumkin Pahar”\tis a
\ncultivable land\t and, therefore, by operation of explanation
\nto Section  7<\/a>, it  stands excluded  from the  vesting in the
\nGaon Sabha. Resultantly, the respondents being the owners of
\nthe property  are entitled  to the  compensation. Thus, this
\nappeal by special leave.\n<\/p>\n
     Initially, Shri  M.C. Dhingra, learned counsel for some
\nof the respondents, as brought to our notice that since this
\nCourt had  dismissed similar  special leave  petitions, this
\nappeal does not merit consideration. We find no force in the
\ncontention. This  Court, by  then, had already granted leave
\nin this\t appeal, but  unfortunately, that was not brought to
\nthe notice  of the  respective\tBenches\t including  the\t one
\npresided over  by one  of us  (K. Ramaswamy,  J.), when\t the
\nmatters had  come up. As a consequence, without any speaking
\norder some  special leave petitions came to be dismissed. In
\nview of\t the settled legal position by a catena of decisions
\nof this\t Court that  the dismissal of special leave petition
\nwithout speaking order does not constitute res judicata, the
\nquestion of law is at large to be gone into. Accordingly, We
\nreject the  objection and  we have heard the counsel on both
\nsides on merits.\n<\/p>\n
     Shri Wasim A. Qadri, learned counsel for Union of India
\nand Gaon  Sabha, in  a pains  taking investigation  and neat
\npresentation,  has   brought  to  our  notice  the  relevant
\nprovisions of  the Act\tand the\t decision of  this Court  in
\nHatti vs. Sunder Singh<\/a> [(1971) 2 SCR 163] and contended that
\nthe object  of the  Act and the Delhi Land Reforms, 1954 was
\nto extinguish  the pre-existing\t right, title  and  interest
\nheld  by  bhumidar,  sirdar,  tenant,  proprietor  etc.\t and
\nconferment of  new rights in them. It is also envisaged that
\nall other  lands shall\tstand vested  in the  Gaon Sabha  by
\noperation of  Section 154<\/a>  of the Act read with Section 7<\/a> of
\nthe Act.  The respondents  are not  bhumidars. The  land  in
\nquestion has  been recorded  in the revenue records as “gair
\nmumkin pahar”,\tin other  words, it is an uncultivable waste
\nland. It  is not  excluded from the definition of waste land
\nas explained  in explanation  to Section  7<\/a> of\tthe  Act.  A
\nreading of  the relevant  provision of Sections 5<\/a>, 7<\/a>, 11<\/a> and
\n154<\/a> of\tthe Act\t read with the definitions of `land’ defined
\nin  Section  3(13)<\/a>,  `holding  defined\tin  Section  3(11A)<\/a>,
\n`khudkhast’ defined in Section 3(12A)<\/a> and `proprietor’ under
\nSection 3(17)<\/a>  of the  Act, would  clearly indicate that the
\nrespondents are\t not bhumidars\tin respect  of\tgair  mumkin
\npahar. As  a consequence, the land stands vested in the Gaon
\nSabha under  Section 7<\/a>\tread with Section 154<\/a> of the Act. On
\nthe other  hand, Shri  Dhingra and Shri L.C. Chechi, learned
\ncounsel for  the respondents  contended that by operation of
\nthe comprehensive  definition of `waste land’ in explanation
\nto Section  7<\/a> of  the Act read with the object of conferment
\nof right  under Section\t 11<\/a> read  with Section 5<\/a> of the Act,
\nthe respondents are bhumidars. As a consequence, the land is
\na cultivable land which confers them title to the land under
\nthe  Act.   It\tis   also    further  contended\t that  in  a
\nrepresentative suit  for a declaration that this gair mumkin
\npahar is  cultivable land was declared to be so by the civil
\nCourt. The  Deputy Commissioner’s finding under the Act that
\nit is  a waste land is not correct. On an appeal against the
\ndecree, the High Court remitted the matter with an option to
\nthe Deputy  Commissioner had  not decided  that it  is\tgair
\nmumkin pahar.  As a consequence, the vesting order passed by
\nthe  Deputy   Commissioner  is\tnon  est.  The\tHigh  Court,
\ntherefore, had\trightly gone  into the\tquestion. In support
\nthereof, the  learned counsel  placed reliance on a judgment
\nof the\tlearned single\tjudge in a second appeal. It is also
\ncontended that\tthe view  taken by the Division Bench of the
\nHigh Court  in that  behalf is\tcorrect in  law. It does not
\nwarrant interference.\n<\/p>\n
     Having  regard   to  the  respective  contentions,\t the
\nquestion that  arise for  consideration is  :  whether\tgair
\nmumkin pahar  land is  cultivable  land\t coming\t within\t the
\nmeaning of explanation to Section 7<\/a> so as to exclude it from
\nthe operation  of the  main part  of Section  7<\/a> of  the Act?
\nSection 3(13)<\/a> defines `land; thus:\n<\/p>\n
     “(15) “land” except in Sections 22<\/a>,
\n     23<\/a>\t and  24<\/a>,  means  land\theld  or
\n     occupied  for   purposes  connected
\n     with agriculture,\thorticulture  or
\n     animal\thusbandry      including
\n     pisciculture  and\tpoultry\t farming
\n     and includes…”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Admittedly, the lands in question have been recorded in
\nthe revenue  recorded as  gair mumkin  pahar. Therefore, the
\nlands cannot be held or occupied or used  in connection with
\nagriculture,  horticulture,   animal   husbandry   including
\npisciculture and poultry farming etc.
\n     `Holding’ has  been defined  under Section 3(11)<\/a> of the
\nAct means:\n<\/p>\n
     “(a)…\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (b) in  respect of\t proprietors,  a
\n     parcel or\tparcels of  land held as
\n     sir or khud-khast.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     `khudkhast’ has been defined under Section 3(12A)<\/a> means
\nland (other  than Sir) cultivated by a proprietary either by
\nhimself or by servants or by hired labour,…\n<\/p>\n
     “(a) at  the commencement\tof  this
\n     Act, or  (b) at any time during the
\n     period of\tfive  years  immediately
\n     before  the  commencement\tof  this
\n     Act,  whether  or\tnot  it\t was  so
\n     cultivated\t at  such  commencement,
\n     provided that  it has  not, at  any
\n     time   after    having   been    so
\n     cultivated\t been\tlet  out   to  a
\n     tenant”.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Therefore, it  is clear  from the above provisions that
\nthe gair  mumkin pahar\tis not\ta  land\t cultivated  by\t the
\nproprietor and so it is not a khud-khast land.\n<\/p>\n
     Section 5<\/a> of the Act defines Bhumidar thus :
\n     “5.   Bhumidhar–\t  Every\t  person
\n     belonging to  any of  the following
\n     classes shall  be a  Bhumidhar  and
\n     shall  have   all\trights\t and  be
\n     subject  to   all\tthe  liabilities
\n     conferred\t or   imposed\tupon   a
\n     Bhumidhar by  or  under  this  Act,
\n     namely:\n<\/p>\n
     (a) a  proprietor\tholding\t Sir  or
\n     Khudkhast\t land\ta   proprietor’s
\n     grover holder,  an occupancy tenant
\n     under  Section   5\t of  the  Punjab
\n     Tenancy Act,  1887, paying\t rent at
\n     revenue rates  or a  person holding
\n     land   under    Patta   Dawami   or
\n     Istamrari with  rights of\ttransfer
\n     by\t  sale,\t   who\t are\tdeclared
\n     Bhumidhars on  the commencement  of
\n     this Act:\n<\/p>\n
     (b) every\tclass of  tenants  other
\n     than those\t referred to  in  clause\n<\/p>\n
     (a) and subtenants who are declared
\n     to in clause (a) and subtenants who
\n     are  declared   Bhumidhars\t on  the
\n     commencement of this Act ; or\n<\/p>\n
     (c) every\tperson\twho,  after  the
\n     commencement  of\tthis   Act,   is
\n     admitted to  land as  Bhumidhar  or
\n     who acquires Bhumidhar rights under
\n     any provisions of the Act.”\n<\/p>\n
     Resultantly, the  respondents are not bhumidhars, since
\nthey did  not hold  the land  as proprietor  and, therefore,
\nshall not have proprietary right in gair mumkin pahar.\n<\/p>\n
     part B  of the  Act postulates  acquisition of  certain
\nrights of  proprietors. Section 7<\/a> under this part postulates
\nthe rights  of proprietary  in waste lands. pasture lands of
\ncommon utility\tetc. to\t vest in Gaon Sabha and compensation
\nto be paid for the…\n<\/p>\n
     “(1) All  rights of  an  individual
\n     proprietor\t     or\t     proprietors
\n     pertaining to  waste lands. grazing
\n     or\t collection  of\t forest\t produce
\n     from forest  or fish from fisheries
\n     lands of  common utility,\tsuch  as
\n     customary\tcommon\t pasture  lands,
\n     cremation or  burial grounds, abide
\n     sites pathways, public wells, tanks
\n     and water\tchannels, or  khalihans,
\n     whether  covered\tby  an\texisting
\n     contract between such proprietor or
\n     proprietors and any other person or
\n     not, shall\t with  effect  from  the
\n     commencement   of\t this\tAct   be
\n     terminated in  accordance with  the
\n     provision of  sub-section\t(2)  and
\n     the said  contracts, if  any, shall
\n     become void  with effect  from such
\n     commencement.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     provided that where such land was a
\n     result of consolidation of holdings
\n     made  available  for  use\tfor  any
\n     purposes other  than those referred
\n     to in  this subsection,  land  kept
\n     aside  in\texchange  thereof,  land
\n     kept aside\t in exchange thereof, as
\n     a\tresult\tof  such  consolidation,
\n     shall for\tthe purposes of this Act
\n     be deemed\tto  be\tland  originally
\n     meant for\tpurposes referred  to in
\n     this sub-section.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Explanation —  for the  purpose of
\n     this sub-section–\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (i)  “waste   land’  shall\t include
\n     cultivable and  uncultivable  waste
\n     area or  the village  including any
\n     land  in\tthe  bed   of  a  river,
\n     occupied  or   held  by   f  river,
\n     occupied  or   held  by   an  Asami
\n     referred to in Section 6(a)(iii)<\/a> of
\n     the  Act  except  the  uncultivated
\n     area—\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (a)  included  in\tthe  holding  of
\n     such proprietor proprietors, or\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (b)  used for  purposes  other than
\n     those mentioned  in clause (143) of
\n\t  Section 3<\/a>  at any  time before
\n     the 26th day of October, 1956 or\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (c)  acquired    by    bona    fide
\n     purchaser for  value  at  any  time
\n     before the\t 28th  day  of\tOctober,
\n     1958 for  purpose other than  those
\n     mentioned in clause (13) of Section\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     3.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Conjoint  reading\t of  Section   7<\/a>   read\t  with\t the
\nexplanation, it\t emerges that  unless the  waste land stands
\nexcluded from  Section 7<\/a>,  the rights  of the proprietors in
\nwaste lands,  posture lands  or community utility lands etc.
\nshall vest  in Gaon  Sabha. The\t waste land  included in the
\nholding of  the proprietor  stands excepted  from the  waste
\nland contemplated by Section 7<\/a>.\n<\/p>\n
     Section  11<\/a>   of  the   Act  provides   declaration  of
\nBhumidhari Rights  in favour  of  proprietors  and  superior
\nclass of  tenants, compensation and revenue.
\nSubsection (1) provides that;\n<\/p>\n
     “(1) Subject  to the  provisions of
\n     Section 10<\/a>, the Deputy Commissioner
\n     shall declare  as Bhumidhar persons
\n     holding   the    following\t  lands,
\n     namely:-\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (a)  Khudkhast    land\tor     a
\n     proprietor’s grover  in the  tracts
\n     to which  the Punjab  Tenancy  Act,
\n     1887 was  applicable or Sir land or
\n     khudkhast land  or\t a  proprietor’s
\n     grove in  the tracts  to which  the
\n     Agra   Tenancy   Act,   1901,   was
\n     applicable:\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (b)  land held by occupancy tenants
\n     under  Section   5\t of  the  Punjab
\n     Tenancy Act,  1887, with  right  of
\n     transfer by sale; and\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     (c)  land held  under patta  Dawami
\n     or Istamrari  by tenants with right
\n     of transfer by sale.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     By operation of Section 11<\/a>, all the lands including the
\nholding\t  of the  Bhumidhar etc.  shall be  declared to be a
\nBhumidhar right.  It is,  thus, clear  that by\toperation of
\nSection 5<\/a> read with the definition of khudkhast land and the
\nexplanation to\twaste land  under Section  7<\/a> of the Act, the
\nlands not  having been\theld by\t Bhumidhars,  it  cannot  be
\ntreated to  be a  waste land  for the  purpose of  exclusion
\nunder the explanation from the purview of Section 7<\/a> of the
\nAct.\n<\/p>\n
     what would\t be  the  consequence  has  been  stated  in
\nSection 154<\/a>  of the  Act is  to be  seen. Section  154<\/a> reads
\nthus:\n<\/p>\n
     “154. Vesting of certain lands etc.
\n     in\t Gaon\tSabha  —   (1)\t On  the
\n     commencement of this Act–
\n     (1) all lands whether cultivable or
\n     otherwise, except land for the time
\n     being comprised  in any  holding or
\n     grove,
\n     xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
\n     situate in a Gaon Sabha Area, shall
\n     vest in Gaon Sabha.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     Thus, it  could be\t seen that  except the\tland for the
\ntime being  comprised in any holding or a grove, rest of all
\nlands whether  cultivable or otherwise vest in the Gaon from
\nthe date of the commencement of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
     This question  also no  longer res integra. In  Hatti’s
\ncase  (supra),\t this  Court  has  gone\t into  the  relevant
\nprovisions of the Act and held thus:\n<\/p>\n
     “Sections 6<\/a>,  11<\/a>, 13<\/a> and 154<\/a> of the
\n     Act read together, thus, show that,
\n     after  the\t Act  came  into  force,
\n     proprietors of agricultural land as
\n     such ceased  to exist.  if any land
\n     was  part\t of  a\t holding  of   a
\n     proprietor, he became a Bhumidar of
\n     it. if  it was part of a holding of
\n     some other person, such as a tenant
\n     or a  sub-tenant  etc.,  he  became
\n     either a  Bhumidar\t  or  an  Asami,
\n     whereupon\t the   rights\tof   the
\n     proprietor\t in  that  land\t ceased,
\n     Land, which  were\tnot  holding  of
\n     either the\t proprietor or any other
\n     person, vested  in the  Gaon Sabha.
\n     In the  case of  proprietors, their
\n     rights in\tthe  land  continued  to
\n     exist only\t in respect  of holdings
\n     which, under  the definition,  must
\n     have  been\t  either  their\t sir  or
\n     khudkasht at  the\tcommencement  of
\n     the Act.  If  it  was  not\t sir  or
\n     khudkasht of a proprietor, it would
\n     not    be\t  his\t holding    and,
\n     consequently, such\t land would vest
\n     in the  Gaon  Sabha  under\t Section
\n     154<\/a>, the  result of  which would be
\n     that the  rights of  the proprietor
\n     would be extinguished”.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     As stated\tearlier, indisputably in the revenue records
\nthe land in question had been recorded as gair mumkin pahar.
\nUnder those circumstances, this gair mumkin pahar land which
\nwas  not   held\t by  the  respondents  as  khudkhastdars  as
\nproprietors thereof.  As a consequence, the land shall stand
\nvested in  the Gaon  Sabha. It\tis true\t that in the earlier
\ncivil  suit   filed  in\t a  representative  capacity  for  a
\ndeclaration, the  High Court has gone into the question, but
\nthe entire  matter was\tleft at\t large stating that “it does
\nnot mean  that the  Deputy Commissioner\t Cannot redecide the
\nmatter. in  fact, he  should reconsider\t the matter and hear
\nthe parties  to determine whether the order is in accordance
\nwith law…  However, I would also like to clarify that this
\ndoes not  by any  means end  the matter”.  Thus, there is no
\nconcluded finding  recorded by\tthe High Court in the second
\nappeal with  regard to\tthe nature of the land. On the other
\nhand, the  matter was  kept at\tlarge. At  that\t stage,\t the
\nacquisition proceedings were initiated. As a consequence, no
\nfurther action has been taken by the Deputy commissioner.
\nConsequently,  the   entire  issue  was\t at  large.  Obvious
\ntherefore, that when there was conflict of decisions between
\ntow learned  single Judges, the Division Bench has gone into
\nthe question. But, it had not properly considered the effect
\nof the provisions of the Act and came to the conclusion that
\nthe explanation\t of `waste  land’ under\t Section 7<\/a>  includes
\ncultivable, waste  and gair mumkin pahar is cultivable waste
\nland and  the respondents  became owners  of  the  land\t and
\nentitled  to   the  compensation.   In\tview  of  the  above
\ndiscussion, the view taken by the division. Bench is clearly
\nin error. Accordingly, we set aside the judgment of the High
\nCourt and confirmed that of the District Court.\n<\/p>\n
     The  appeal   is  accordingly    allowed,\tbut  in\t the
\ncircumstances, without costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Union Of India & Anr vs Sher Singh & Ors on 7 February, 1997 Bench: K. Ramaswamy, S. Saghir Ahmad PETITIONER: UNION OF INDIA & ANR. Vs. RESPONDENT: SHER SINGH & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07\/02\/1997 BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY, S. SAGHIR AHMAD ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT: O R D E R This […]<\/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-250804","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nUnion Of India & Anr vs Sher Singh & Ors on 7 February, 1997 - 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\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Union Of India & Anr vs Sher Singh & Ors on 7 February, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997\" \/>\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=\"1997-02-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-01-11T10:15:43+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Union Of India & Anr vs Sher Singh & Ors on 7 February, 1997\",\"datePublished\":\"1997-02-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-11T10:15:43+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997\"},\"wordCount\":2488,\"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\\\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997\",\"name\":\"Union Of India & Anr vs Sher Singh & Ors on 7 February, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1997-02-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-11T10:15:43+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Union Of India & Anr vs Sher Singh & Ors on 7 February, 1997\"}]},{\"@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":"Union Of India & Anr vs Sher Singh & Ors on 7 February, 1997 - 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\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Union Of India & Anr vs Sher Singh & Ors on 7 February, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1997-02-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-01-11T10:15:43+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Union Of India & Anr vs Sher Singh & Ors on 7 February, 1997","datePublished":"1997-02-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-11T10:15:43+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997"},"wordCount":2488,"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\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997","name":"Union Of India & Anr vs Sher Singh & Ors on 7 February, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1997-02-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-11T10:15:43+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-anr-vs-sher-singh-ors-on-7-february-1997#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Union Of India & Anr vs Sher Singh & Ors on 7 February, 1997"}]},{"@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\/250804","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=250804"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/250804\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=250804"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=250804"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=250804"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}