{"id":25569,"date":"1962-01-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1962-01-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962"},"modified":"2016-04-16T16:30:48","modified_gmt":"2016-04-16T11:00:48","slug":"sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962","title":{"rendered":"Sankatha Singh vs State Of U.P on 25 January, 1962"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sankatha Singh vs State Of U.P on 25 January, 1962<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1962 AIR 1208, \t\t  1962 SCR  Supl. (2) 817<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: R Dayal<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Dayal, Raghubar<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nSANKATHA SINGH\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF U.P.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n25\/01\/1962\n\nBENCH:\nDAYAL, RAGHUBAR\nBENCH:\nDAYAL, RAGHUBAR\nDAS, S.K.\nSUBBARAO, K.\n\nCITATION:\n 1962 AIR 1208\t\t  1962 SCR  Supl. (2) 817\n CITATOR INFO :\n RF\t    1971 SC1606\t (22)\n RF\t    1979 SC  87\t (20)\n R\t    1981 SC 736\t (5)\n\n\nACT:\n     Criminal Procedure-Appellate Court's power to\nre-hear appeal\tafter having dismissed it earlier-\nCode of\t Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Act V of 1898),\nss.367, 369, 424.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n     The  question  for\t decision  was\twhether\t a\ncriminal  appellate  court  could  order  the  re-\nhearing\t of   an  appeal   which  it  had  earlier\ndismissed, when\t neither the  appellants nor their\ncounsel appeared,  holding that it had perused the\nrecord\tof   the  case\t and  saw  no  reason  for\ninterference with the trial court's order.\n^\n     Held, that\t the appellate court's omission to\nwrite a\t detailed judgment in a criminal appeal in\nwhich  neither\t the  appellant\t nor  his  counsel\nappeared might\tnot  be\t in  compliance\t with  the\nprovisions  of\ts.367  of  the\tCode  of  Criminal\nProcedure and might be liable to be set aside by a\nsuperior court,\t but  will  not\t give  that  court\nitself power  to set  it  aside\t and  re-hear  the\nappeal.\n     At the re-hearing of the appeal the successor\nof the\tappellate court was competent to consider,\non an  objection being\traised by the other party,\nwhether the  appeal was\t validly  up  for  hearing\nbefore him.\n     Section 369  read with  s. 424 of the Code of\nCriminal  Procedure   specifically  prohibits  the\naltering or reviewing of its order by a court.\n     Inherent  powers\tof  the\t court\tcannot\tbe\nexercised  to\tdo  what   the\tCode  specifically\nprohibits the court from doing.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>     CRIMINAL APPELLATE\t JURISDICTION  :  Criminal<br \/>\nAppeal No. 145 of 1959.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Appeal by special leave from the judgment and<br \/>\norder dated  March 19,1959,  of the Allahabad High<br \/>\nCourt in Criminal Revision No. 1299 of 1957.\n<\/p>\n<p>     S. P.  Sinha and  P.  C.  Agarwala,  for  the<br \/>\nappellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>     G.\t C.   Mathur  and   C.\tP.  Lal,  for  the<br \/>\nrespondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>     1962. January  25. The  Judgment of the Court<br \/>\nwas delivered by<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">818<\/span><br \/>\n     RAGHUBAR DAYAL,  J.-Sankatha Singh and others<br \/>\nappeal against\tthe order  of the  Allahabad  High<br \/>\nCourt dismissing their application for revision of<br \/>\nthe order of the Sessions Judge, Gyanp ur, holding<br \/>\nthe order  of his predecessor for the rehearing of<br \/>\nan appeal  which had  been dismissed earlier to be<br \/>\nultra vires and without jurisdiction and directing<br \/>\nthe Magistrate\tto take immediate steps to execute<br \/>\nthe order passed by it, according to law.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The  appellants   were   convicted\t  by   the<br \/>\nMagistrate, I  Class, Gyanpur,\tof offences  under<br \/>\nss. 452\t and 323 read with s.34, I.P.C. Kharpattu,<br \/>\none of\tthe appellants,\t was also  convicted of an<br \/>\noffence under s. 324, I.P.C. They appealed against<br \/>\ntheir conviction. The appeal was fixed for hearing<br \/>\non November  30, 1956.\tOn that\t date, neither the<br \/>\nappellants nor their counsel appeared in Court and<br \/>\nthe learned  Sessions Judge  dismissed the appeal.<br \/>\nThe relevant portion of his order is:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t  &#8220;The appellants  have been  absent,  and<br \/>\n     their learned  counsel has\t also not appeared<br \/>\n     to\t argue\t the  appeal   on  behalf  of  the<br \/>\n     appellants. I  have perused  the judgment\tof<br \/>\n     the learned Magistrate and seen the record. I<br \/>\n     find no  ground  for  any\tinterference.  The<br \/>\n     appeal is accordingly dismissed.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>     On December  17,  1956,  an  application  was<br \/>\npresented by  the appellants praying that the case<br \/>\nbe restored to its original number so that justice<br \/>\nbe done\t to them. In explaining their absence from<br \/>\nCourt on  the date  of hearing,\t it was\t said that<br \/>\nthey reached  the Court\t somewhat late\tdue to the<br \/>\nEkka, by  which they were travelling, over-turning<br \/>\naccidentally on\t the way  and, as  a result, their<br \/>\ngetting injuries. This application was allowed, on<br \/>\nJuly 2,\t 1957, by  the learned Sessions Judge, Sri<br \/>\nTej Pal\t Singh, who  had dismissed the appeal. His<br \/>\nreasons for  allowing the application appear, from<br \/>\nhis order,<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">819<\/span><br \/>\nto  be\tthat  the  application,\t supported  by\tan<br \/>\naffidavit, showed  that there was sufficient cause<br \/>\nfor the\t non-appearance of  the appellants-accused<br \/>\nat the\ttime of the hearing of the appeal, that s.<br \/>\n423 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter<br \/>\ncalled the  Code) enjoined  the appellate Court to<br \/>\ndispose of  the appeal on merits after hearing the<br \/>\nappellant  or\this   pleader\tand   the   Public<br \/>\nProsecutor, that  no notice was ever issued to the<br \/>\nappellants as required by s. 422 of the Code, that<br \/>\ns. 367\tof the\tCode laid  down\t what  a  judgment<br \/>\nshould contain\tand that  his judgment of November<br \/>\n30, 1956,  amounted to\tno judgment  as it did not<br \/>\ncontain some  of those\tsalient points,\t that  the<br \/>\njudgment was  without jurisdiction as the case was<br \/>\nnot really  considered and no independent judgment<br \/>\nwas arrived  at and that it was necessary that the<br \/>\nappeal be re-heard in the ends of justice.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Sri Tripathi, who succeeded Sri Tej Pal Singh<br \/>\nas Sessions  Judge, and before whom the appeal was<br \/>\nput up for re-hearing, was of the opinion that the<br \/>\nappellate Court\t had no power to review or restore<br \/>\nan appeal  which had  been disposed  of\t and  that<br \/>\ntherefore the  order of his predecessor dated July<br \/>\n2,  1957,  was\tultra  vires  and  passed  without<br \/>\njurisdiction.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Against this  order, the  appellants went\tin<br \/>\nrevision to  the High  Court. The learned Judge of<br \/>\nthe High  Court\t agreed\t with  the  views  of  Sri<br \/>\nTripathi and  accordingly, dismissed  the revision<br \/>\napplication.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The sole  point  for  determination  in  this<br \/>\nappeal is  whether Sri\tTej Pal\t Singh\tcould  set<br \/>\naside his  first order\tdated November\t30,  1956,<br \/>\ndismissing the appeal, when neither the appellants<br \/>\nnor their counsel appeared and could order the re-<br \/>\nhearing of  the appeal.\t We are of opinion that he<br \/>\ncould not  do so and that therefore the view taken<br \/>\nby the High Court is correct.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">820<\/span><\/p>\n<p>     A criminal appeal cannot be dismissed for the<br \/>\ndefault of  the appellants  or their  counsel. The<br \/>\nCourt has  either to  adjourn the  hearing of  the<br \/>\nappeal\tto   enable  them  to  appear,\tor  should<br \/>\nconsider the  appeal on\t merits and pass the final<br \/>\norder. Sri  Tej Pal Singh was aware of this as his<br \/>\norder itself  indicates. He  did not  dismiss  the<br \/>\nappeal\tfor   default.\tHe   himself  perused  the<br \/>\njudgment of  the Magistrate and the record and did<br \/>\nconsider the  merits, as  he says in his order: &#8216;I<br \/>\nfind no\t ground for  any interference&#8217;.\t The  mere<br \/>\nfact that  he had  not expressed  his reasons  for<br \/>\ncoming to  that opinion\t does not mean that he had<br \/>\nnot  considered\t the  material\ton  record  before<br \/>\ncoming to  the conclusion  that there  was no case<br \/>\nfor interference. His omission to write a detailed<br \/>\njudgment  in  the  circumstances  may  be  not\tin<br \/>\ncompliance with\t the provisions\t of s.\t367 of the<br \/>\nCode and  may be  liable to  be\t set  aside  by\t a<br \/>\nsuperior Court, but will not give him any power to<br \/>\nset it\taside himself,\tand  re-hear  the  appeal.<br \/>\nSection 369,  read with s. 424, of the Code, makes<br \/>\nit clear  that the appellate Court is not to alter<br \/>\nor review the judgment once signed, except for the<br \/>\npurpose of correcting a clerical error.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Sri Tej  Pal  Singh  was  in  error  when\the<br \/>\nthought that  s. 423  of  the  Code  enjoined  the<br \/>\nappellate Court\t to dispose  of the  appeal  after<br \/>\nhearing the  appellant\tor  his\t pleader  and  the<br \/>\nPublic Prosecutor.  He omitted to notice the words<br \/>\n&#8216;if he\tappears&#8217; after the expression &#8216;and hearing<br \/>\nthe appellant  or his  pleaders. If  none of these<br \/>\nappears at  the hearing,  the appellate\t Court can<br \/>\nproceed with the disposal of the appeal on merits.<br \/>\nOf course,  a  notice  to  the\tappellant  or  his<br \/>\ncounsel of  the date  of hearing  is an\t essential<br \/>\nprecedent for  the hearing  of the appeal, in view<br \/>\nof s.  422 of  the Code, Sri Tej Pal Singh states,<br \/>\nin his order dated July 2, 1957:\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">821<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\t  &#8220;It will also appear that the conditions<br \/>\n     of s.422,\tCr. P. C. were also not fulfilled,<br \/>\n     as\t no   notice  was   ever  issued   to  the<br \/>\n     appellant.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>He again  missed noticing  that a  notice  of  the<br \/>\nhearing of  the appeal\thas to\tbe given either to<br \/>\nthe appellant  or to  his pleader  and need not be<br \/>\ngiven to  both. He  does not say in his order that<br \/>\nno notice of the date of hearing had been given to<br \/>\nthe appellants&#8217; counsel. The practice, usually, is<br \/>\nto give\t notice of  the date  of  hearing  of  the<br \/>\nappeal to  the counsel\twho informs the appellant,<br \/>\nand  not   to  the   appellant\t personally.   The<br \/>\napplication for\t restoration  indicates\t that  the<br \/>\nappellant knew of the date of hearing.\n<\/p>\n<p>     It has been urged for the appellants that Sri<br \/>\nTej Pal\t Sigh could  order the\tre-hearing of  the<br \/>\nappeal in  the exercise\t of  the  inherent  powers<br \/>\nwhich every  Court possesses  in order\tto further<br \/>\nthe ends  of justice and that Sri Tripathi was not<br \/>\njustified in  any case to sit in judgment over the<br \/>\norder of Sri Tej Pal Singh, an order passed within<br \/>\njurisdiction,  even   though  it   be\terroneous.<br \/>\nAssuming that  Sri  Tej\t Pal  Singh,  as  Sessions<br \/>\nJudge, could  exercise inherent\t powers, we are of<br \/>\nopinion that  he could\tnot pass  the order of the<br \/>\nre-hearing of  the appeal  in the exercise of such<br \/>\npowers when s. 369, read with s. 424, of the Code,<br \/>\nspecifically prohibits\tthe altering  or reviewing<br \/>\nof its order by a Court. Inherent powers cannot be<br \/>\nexercised  to\tdo  what   the\tCode  specifically<br \/>\nprohibits the  Court from  doing. Sri Tripathi was<br \/>\ncompetent to  consider when the other party raised<br \/>\nthe objection  whether the  appeal was\tvalidly up<br \/>\nfor  re-hearing\t before\t him.  He  considered  the<br \/>\nquestion and decided it rightly.\n<\/p>\n<p>     It is  also urged for the appellants that Sri<br \/>\nTej Pal\t Singh, had the jurisdiction to pas orders<br \/>\non the\tapplication presented by the appellants on<br \/>\nDecember 17,1956,  praying for\tthe re-hearing\tof<br \/>\nthe appeal and that therefore his order could not<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">822<\/span><br \/>\nbe  said   to\thave   been   absolutely   without<br \/>\njurisdiction. We  do not  agree. He  certainly had<br \/>\njurisdiction  to   dispose  of\t the   application<br \/>\npresented to  him, but\twhen s.\t 369, of  the Code<br \/>\ndefinitely prohibited  the  Court&#8217;s  reviewing\tor<br \/>\naltering its  judgment, he  had no jurisdiction to<br \/>\nconsider the  point raised  and to  set aside  the<br \/>\norder dismissing  the appeal  and  order  its  re-<br \/>\nhearing.\n<\/p>\n<p>     We therefore  see no force in this appeal and<br \/>\naccordingly dismiss it.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t Appeal dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Sankatha Singh vs State Of U.P on 25 January, 1962 Equivalent citations: 1962 AIR 1208, 1962 SCR Supl. (2) 817 Author: R Dayal Bench: Dayal, Raghubar PETITIONER: SANKATHA SINGH Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF U.P. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 25\/01\/1962 BENCH: DAYAL, RAGHUBAR BENCH: DAYAL, RAGHUBAR DAS, S.K. SUBBARAO, K. CITATION: 1962 AIR [&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-25569","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>Sankatha Singh vs State Of U.P on 25 January, 1962 - 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\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sankatha Singh vs State Of U.P on 25 January, 1962 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962\" \/>\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=\"1962-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-04-16T11:00:48+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sankatha Singh vs State Of U.P on 25 January, 1962\",\"datePublished\":\"1962-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-16T11:00:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962\"},\"wordCount\":1432,\"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\\\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962\",\"name\":\"Sankatha Singh vs State Of U.P on 25 January, 1962 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1962-01-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-04-16T11:00:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sankatha Singh vs State Of U.P on 25 January, 1962\"}]},{\"@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":"Sankatha Singh vs State Of U.P on 25 January, 1962 - 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\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sankatha Singh vs State Of U.P on 25 January, 1962 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1962-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-04-16T11:00:48+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sankatha Singh vs State Of U.P on 25 January, 1962","datePublished":"1962-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-16T11:00:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962"},"wordCount":1432,"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\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962","name":"Sankatha Singh vs State Of U.P on 25 January, 1962 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1962-01-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-04-16T11:00:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sankatha-singh-vs-state-of-u-p-on-25-january-1962#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sankatha Singh vs State Of U.P on 25 January, 1962"}]},{"@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\/25569","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=25569"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25569\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25569"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25569"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25569"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}