{"id":261996,"date":"2004-08-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2004-08-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004"},"modified":"2015-09-28T16:52:41","modified_gmt":"2015-09-28T11:22:41","slug":"rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004","title":{"rendered":"Rajinder &amp; Ors vs State Of Haryana &amp; Anr on 25 August, 2004"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Rajinder &amp; Ors vs State Of Haryana &amp; Anr on 25 August, 2004<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: B.N.Agrawal<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: B.N. Agrawal, H.K. Sema<\/div>\n<pre id=\"pre_1\">           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (crl.)  180 of 2004\n\nPETITIONER:\nRajinder  &amp; Ors.\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\nRESPONDENT:\nState of Haryana &amp; Anr.     \t\t\t\t\t\t\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT: 25\/08\/2004\n\nBENCH:\nB.N. AGRAWAL &amp;  H.K. SEMA\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p id=\"p_1\">J U D G M E N T<\/p>\n<p>B.N.AGRAWAL,J.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_1\">\tThe appellants along with accused Laxman Singh were tried and by<br \/>\njudgment rendered by  the trial court accused Laxman Singh, though  acquitted of<br \/>\nthe charge under <a href=\"\/doc\/244673\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 27<\/a> of the Arms Act,  was convicted  under <a href=\"\/doc\/1560742\/\" id=\"a_1\">Section 302<\/a> of<br \/>\nthe Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as &#8220;<a href=\"\/doc\/1569253\/\" id=\"a_2\">I.P.C<\/a>.&#8221;)  whereas four appellants<br \/>\nwere convicted under <a href=\"\/doc\/1560742\/\" id=\"a_3\">Sections 302<\/a>\/<a href=\"\/doc\/999134\/\" id=\"a_4\">149<\/a> I.P.C. and all sentenced to undergo<br \/>\nimprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.500\/- each, in default, rigorous<br \/>\nimprisonment for a period of one month.  Accused Laxman Singh was further<br \/>\nconvicted under <a href=\"\/doc\/455468\/\" id=\"a_5\">Section 307<\/a> I.P.C. and the appellants  under <a href=\"\/doc\/455468\/\" id=\"a_6\">Sections 307<\/a>\/<a href=\"\/doc\/999134\/\" id=\"a_7\">149<\/a><br \/>\nI.P.C. and each one of them sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a<br \/>\nperiod of five years and to pay a fine of Rs.500\/- each, in default, rigorous<br \/>\nimprisonment for a period of one month.  They were also convicted under <a href=\"\/doc\/763672\/\" id=\"a_8\">Sections<br \/>\n148<\/a>  and <a href=\"\/doc\/1011035\/\" id=\"a_9\">323<\/a>\/<a href=\"\/doc\/999134\/\" id=\"a_10\">149<\/a>  I.P.C.  and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a<br \/>\nperiod of one year and three months respectively. All the sentences, however, were<br \/>\nordered to run concurrently. On appeal being preferred, the High Court of Punjab<br \/>\nand Haryana confirmed the convictions whereupon two special leave petitions were<br \/>\nfiled before this Court, one by accused Laxman Singh whereas the other by the<br \/>\nappellants.  The special  leave petition of  accused Laxman Singh has been<br \/>\ndismissed but leave to appeal was granted in the case of  appellants giving rise to<br \/>\nthe present appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_2\">\tThe prosecution case in short was that on 10.4.1999 at about 4.30. P.M.,<br \/>\nwhen Lakhan Lal, the complainant, and his father Shiv Charan were at their shop,<br \/>\nthe appellants and accused Laxman Singh armed with lathies and gun respectively<br \/>\ncame there in a jeep bearing Registration No. HR  26 J-0051 and  started abusing<br \/>\nthe complainant and his father whereupon the complainant and his father came out<br \/>\nof their shop and asked  the reason for abusing them.  At this, the appellants threw<br \/>\nstones and sticks on them and in order to save themselves,  the complainant and<br \/>\nhis father ran towards their  house and when they were on raised platform of the<br \/>\nhouse, accused Laxman Singh, who had a double barrel gun, fired shot from the<br \/>\nsame. One shot hit Shiv Charan in his head while the other right calf region as a<br \/>\nresult of which  Shiv Charan fell down.  When the complainant tried to take care of<br \/>\nhis father, gun was fired at him too and stones pelted.  While he escaped unhurt<br \/>\nfrom the gun shots as they were off target, he received injuries by pelting of stones<br \/>\non  his left palm and right calf.  Finding that his father had already died, the<br \/>\ncomplainant, out of fear,  entered his house and closed the door from within.<br \/>\nThereafter, the accused persons stoned the women of the house  who were on the<br \/>\nroof and they were also fired at.  The ladies came down out of fear and thereafter<br \/>\nthe accused fled away.  Besides the complainant, his brother Johri Mal had also<br \/>\nseen the occurrence. In the meantime, Meenu, wife of the complainant, left for the<br \/>\nPolice Station, arrived there at about 6.45 P.M. and reported the incident of<br \/>\nphysical violence.  On her information, entry was made in the Daily Diary and<br \/>\nShakuntala, S.H.O., Police Station, Bilaspur and Vinod Kumar, Inspector, left for<br \/>\nthe place of occurrence with her where fardbayan of Lakhan Lal was recorded<br \/>\nstating the aforesaid facts, on the basis of which First Information Report was<br \/>\ndrawn up.  The police after registering the case took up investigation and on<br \/>\ncompletion thereof submitted chargesheet, on receipt whereof the learned<br \/>\nMagistrate took cognizance and  committed all the aforesaid accused persons,<br \/>\nincluding the appellants, to the Court of Session to face trial.<br \/>\n\tThe defence of accused persons was that they were innocent, no<br \/>\noccurrence, much less the one alleged, had taken place, the deceased might have<br \/>\nreceived injuries at some other place of occurrence in some other manner and the<br \/>\naccused were falsely implicated by  members of the prosecution party to feed fat<br \/>\nthe old grudge.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_3\">\tDuring trial, the prosecution examined sixteen witnesses in all, out of whom<br \/>\nPW1 was Dr. Sanjay Narula, who conducted the post-mortem examination on<br \/>\ndead body of the deceased  and PW2, Lakhan Lal, the informant, and his brother<br \/>\nJohri Mal, PW3, who  claimed to be eyewitnesses to the alleged occurrence.  PWs<br \/>\n4, 5 and 8 to 15 were formal witnesses and PW6,  Dr. Rajesh Kumar Sharma,<br \/>\nexamined the injuries of PW2 whereas PW7 and PW16 were the two Investigating<br \/>\nOfficers in the case.  The defence had not examined any witness in the case  on<br \/>\nhand.  Upon the conclusion of trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge<br \/>\nconvicted all the accused persons, as stated above, and their convictions having<br \/>\nbeen confirmed by the High Court,  the present appeal by special leave by the<br \/>\nappellants; conviction of accused Laxman Singh having been confirmed by this<br \/>\nCourt by dismissal of his special leave petition.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_4\">\tMr. U.R. Lalit, learned Senior Counsel appearing in support of the appeal,<br \/>\nsubmitted that  though the occurrence has taken place in the broad day-light, the<br \/>\nprosecution failed to examine a single independent witness but has examined PWs<br \/>\n2 and 3 who are nobody else than sons of the deceased. These witnesses<br \/>\nconsistently supported the prosecution  case, disclosed in the First Information<br \/>\nReport, in all material particulars, in their statements made before the Police as<br \/>\nwell as  substantive evidence in  Court. The trial court as well as the High Court<br \/>\nhas placed reliance upon their evidence and were of the view that merely because<br \/>\nthey were related to the deceased, the same ipso facto could not have been the<br \/>\nground to discard their evidence.  In our view, the trial court as well as the High<br \/>\nCourt was quite justified  in placing reliance upon their evidence as they  were<br \/>\nnatural witnesses and  consistently supported  the prosecution case.  That  apart,<br \/>\ntheir evidence has been accepted by this Court by upholding  conviction of accused<br \/>\nLaxman Singh and there is no reason to discard their evidence even in relation to<br \/>\nthe appellants.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_5\">\tThe learned Senior Counsel next submitted that the prosecution case and<br \/>\nevidence of firing by accused Laxman Singh were highly doubtful and evidence of<br \/>\nPWs 2 and 3 on this count could not have been relied upon.  In our view,<br \/>\nsubmission has been made only to be rejected. So far as Laxman Singh is<br \/>\nconcerned, his conviction having been  upheld by this Court by dismissal of his<br \/>\nspecial leave petition, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, it is not<br \/>\npossible for this Court to go into the correctness or otherwise of conviction of the<br \/>\nsaid accused. The learned counsel then submitted that though according to<br \/>\nprosecution case, the appellants were armed with sticks and  used the same during<br \/>\nthe course of occurrence,  no stick was recovered.  It is true that  sticks were not<br \/>\nrecovered from any place, much less possession of  any of the appellants, but that<br \/>\ncannot be a ground  to throw out the prosecution case when the same has been<br \/>\notherwise found to be truthful by credible evidence. The learned counsel also<br \/>\nsubmitted that PWs 2 and 3 stated in court that the appellants exhorted for killing<br \/>\nthe deceased, though no such case was disclosed  either in the First Information<br \/>\nReport or in the statement of these witnesses before the police.  Even if the<br \/>\nprosecution failed to prove case of exhortation by the appellants by credible<br \/>\nevidence,  the same cannot  affect the prosecution case in relation to the<br \/>\nappellants.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_6\">\tLearned counsel further submitted that the prosecution case of pelting<br \/>\nstones on the deceased as well as on PW2  and assaulting them by lathies is not<br \/>\nsupported by the medical evidence as the doctor found injuries by fire arm.   The<br \/>\ndoctor &#8211; PW1, who conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of the<br \/>\ndeceased, found as many as eight injuries on his person and in his opinion, injury<br \/>\nnos. 1 and 2 alone could have been caused by fire arm and not the other six<br \/>\ninjuries which does not eliminate  the fact of causing  injuries by lathies and stone<br \/>\npelting by the appellants. So far as  the evidence of  doctor &#8211; PW6, who examined<br \/>\nthe injuries of PW2, is concerned,  he  specifically stated that injuries found on him<br \/>\ncould be caused by blunt weapon, as such the injuries could have been caused by<br \/>\nlathies and pelting of stones by the appellants. Thus, we have no difficulty in<br \/>\nholding that the prosecution case of causing injuries by lathies and pelting of<br \/>\nstones is corroborated by medical evidence.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_7\">\tThe learned  counsel lastly submitted that the common object of the unlawful<br \/>\nassembly, of which the appellants were members, could not have been to cause<br \/>\ndeath of the deceased  but the same could have been, at the highest, to cause<br \/>\nsimple hurt.  In our view, the submission has been made only to be rejected as the<br \/>\ndefinite prosecution case as well as the evidence is that  the five accused persons,<br \/>\nincluding the four appellants, came together in a jeep, one of whom was armed<br \/>\nwith gun and others  with lathies, after arriving at the place of occurrence, they<br \/>\nabused members of prosecution party and on protest being made by them,<br \/>\naccused Laxman Singh fired at the deceased, who succumbed to the injuries,<br \/>\nwhereas the appellants pelted stones upon the deceased and PW2 and threw<br \/>\nlathies upon them, as a result of which they received several other injuries apart<br \/>\nfrom the two injuries by fire arm  inflicted by accused Laxman Singh upon the<br \/>\ndeceased, and thereupon,  they fled away together  from the place of occurrence.<br \/>\nOn these facts, we have no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that the common<br \/>\nobject of the unlawful assembly, of which the appellants were members, was to<br \/>\ncause death of the deceased  and pursuant to that common object, one of the<br \/>\nmembers of the unlawful assembly, namely, accused Laxman Singh inflicted two<br \/>\nfatal  injuries upon the deceased by fire arm   whereas the appellants inflicted six<br \/>\nother injuries on him.  Thus, we do not find any substance in this submission as<br \/>\nwell. In view of the foregoing discussion, we are of the view that  prosecution has<br \/>\nsucceeded in proving its case beyond reasonable doubt and the High Court has<br \/>\nnot committed any error in upholding  convictions of the appellants,  as such no<br \/>\ninterference is called for by this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p id=\"p_8\">\tAccordingly, the appeal fails and the same is dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Rajinder &amp; Ors vs State Of Haryana &amp; Anr on 25 August, 2004 Author: B.N.Agrawal Bench: B.N. Agrawal, H.K. Sema CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 180 of 2004 PETITIONER: Rajinder &amp; Ors. RESPONDENT: State of Haryana &amp; Anr. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 25\/08\/2004 BENCH: B.N. AGRAWAL &amp; H.K. SEMA JUDGMENT: J U D [&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-261996","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>Rajinder &amp; Ors vs State Of Haryana &amp; Anr on 25 August, 2004 - 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\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rajinder &amp; Ors vs State Of Haryana &amp; Anr on 25 August, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004\" \/>\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=\"2004-08-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-09-28T11:22:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Rajinder &amp; Ors vs State Of Haryana &amp; Anr on 25 August, 2004\",\"datePublished\":\"2004-08-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-28T11:22:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004\"},\"wordCount\":1774,\"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\\\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004\",\"name\":\"Rajinder &amp; Ors vs State Of Haryana &amp; Anr on 25 August, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2004-08-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-28T11:22:41+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Rajinder &amp; Ors vs State Of Haryana &amp; Anr on 25 August, 2004\"}]},{\"@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":"Rajinder &amp; Ors vs State Of Haryana &amp; Anr on 25 August, 2004 - 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\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rajinder &amp; Ors vs State Of Haryana &amp; Anr on 25 August, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2004-08-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-09-28T11:22:41+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Rajinder &amp; Ors vs State Of Haryana &amp; Anr on 25 August, 2004","datePublished":"2004-08-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-28T11:22:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004"},"wordCount":1774,"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\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004","name":"Rajinder &amp; Ors vs State Of Haryana &amp; Anr on 25 August, 2004 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2004-08-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-28T11:22:41+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajinder-ors-vs-state-of-haryana-anr-on-25-august-2004#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Rajinder &amp; Ors vs State Of Haryana &amp; Anr on 25 August, 2004"}]},{"@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\/261996","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=261996"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/261996\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=261996"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=261996"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=261996"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}