{"id":262466,"date":"2009-09-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-09-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009"},"modified":"2016-01-11T07:40:54","modified_gmt":"2016-01-11T02:10:54","slug":"amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009","title":{"rendered":"Amar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 September, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Amar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 September, 2009<\/div>\n
Crl.Revision No.276 of 2000                                            1\n\n\nIN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.\n\n                                      Crl.Rev.No.276 of 2000\n                                      Date of decision: 3.9.2009\nAmar Singh\n\n                                                  ... Petitioner\n              versus\n\nState of Punjab\n                                                  ... Respondent\n\nCORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH.\n\n\nPresent:     Mr.Paramjit Batta, Advocate,\n             for the petitioner.\n             Mr.P.S.Grewal, AAG, Punjab.\n             ...\n\nJORA SINGH, J.\n<\/pre>\n
             Amar Singh filed this revision against the order dated<\/p>\n
27.7.1999 rendered by Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib. Vide<\/p>\n
this judgment, appeal against the order of conviction dated 3.2.1998 passed<\/p>\n
by JMIC, Fatehgarh Sahib, was dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
             As per order of conviction dated 3.2.1998, the petitioner was<\/p>\n
convicted under Section 13<\/a> of the Gambling Act and was directed to pay a<\/p>\n
fine of Rs.100\/-, and in default of payment of fine, he was sentenced to<\/p>\n
undergo imprisonment till rising of the Court.\n<\/p>\n
             Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 20.2.1996, HC Gurmel<\/p>\n
Singh along with police party was present near Chowk Motewala, in<\/p>\n
connection with patrol duty. Then he received a secret information to the<\/p>\n
effect that Amar Singh was playing the game of gambling by means of darra<\/p>\n
satta while present near Sabzi Mandi, Bassi Pathana, by saying to pay<\/p>\n
Rs.80\/- against the stake money of Rs.1\/- currency note on the successful<\/p>\n
number. On receipt of secret information, ruqa was sent to the Police
\n Crl.Revision No.276 of 2000                                                 2<\/span><\/p>\n
Station, on the basis of which, formal FIR was registered. Thereafter,<\/p>\n
raiding party was constituted. PHC Sawinder Singh was directed to wear<\/p>\n
plain clothes. Marked Rs.5\/- currency note was handed over to PHC<\/p>\n
Sawinder Singh with a direction to stake Rs.5\/- currency note at No.75 and<\/p>\n
after obtaining a receipt, to give the agreed signal to the police party. Vide<\/p>\n
memo, marked Rs.5\/- currency note was handed over to PHC Sawinder<\/p>\n
Singh and as per direction of the IO, PHC Sawinder Singh had gone to the<\/p>\n
accused and had staked marked Rs.5\/- currency note at No.75.             After<\/p>\n
obtaining receipt, PHC Sawinder Singh gave agreed signal to the police<\/p>\n
party. The accused was apprehended and on personal search of the accused,<\/p>\n
one piece of card board, one parcha, one ball pen and currency notes worth<\/p>\n
Rs.155\/-, including marked currency note were recovered from him.<\/p>\n
Recovered articles were taken into police possession vide separate memo<\/p>\n
attested by the witnesses. Rough site plan with correct marginal notes was<\/p>\n
prepared. Accused was arrested. PHC Sawinder Singh had also produced<\/p>\n
parchi before the IO and the same was taken into police possession vide<\/p>\n
separate memo attested by the witnesses. The accused was released on bail<\/p>\n
at the spot and after completion of investigation, challan was presented.<\/p>\n
             After hearing APP for the State, defence counsel for the<\/p>\n
accused and from the perusal of the file, the trial Court opined that a prima<\/p>\n
facie case under Section 13<\/a> of the Gambling Act was made out against the<\/p>\n
accused. Accordingly, charge was framed under Section 13<\/a> of the Gambling<\/p>\n
Act against the petitioner, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.<\/p>\n
             Prosecution examined HC Gurmel Singh (PW1) and PHC<\/p>\n
Sawinder Singh (PW2) and closed its evidence.\n<\/p>\n
 Crl.Revision No.276 of 2000                                             3<\/span><\/p>\n
\n
            After closing of prosecution evidence, statement of the accused<\/p>\n
was recorded under Section 313<\/a> Cr.P.C. The accused denied all prosecution<\/p>\n
allegations and pleaded to be innocent. Defence version of the accused was<\/p>\n
that he was falsely implicated. Opportunity was given to the accused to lead<\/p>\n
evidence but no evidence in defence was led.\n<\/p>\n
            After hearing APP for the State, defence counsel for the<\/p>\n
accused and from the perusal of evidence on the file, the petitioner was<\/p>\n
convicted and sentenced by the trial Court, and against the order of trial<\/p>\n
Court, appeal was preferred but the appeal was dismissed vide impugned<\/p>\n
judgment.\n<\/p>\n
            Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that evidence on file<\/p>\n
was not properly scrutinized. PHC Sawinder Singh was joined as bogus<\/p>\n
punter but there was no shadow witness. No evidence on the file that the<\/p>\n
petitioner had promised to pay 80 times if marked currency note is staked at<\/p>\n
No.75 and No.75 is the successful number. Mere recovery of parchi from<\/p>\n
the bogus punter and some articles from the petitioner are not sufficient to<\/p>\n
opine that the petitioner was playing the game of darra satta. In support of<\/p>\n
his contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on (i )<\/p>\n
1959 PLR 439, Tarsem Lal vs. The State<\/a>, and (ii) 1964 Current Law<\/p>\n
Journal 182, The State vs. Gainda Ram<\/a>.\n<\/p>\n
            Learned State counsel argued that the petitioner was playing<\/p>\n
the game of darra satta at public place. The petitioner was proclaiming to<\/p>\n
pay 80 times if the amount was staked on a particular number and that<\/p>\n
number was the successful number. Marked currency note of Rs.5\/- was<\/p>\n
handed over to bogus punter with a direction to stake the marked currency<\/p>\n
note at No.75. Receipt was obtained from the petitioner and then agreed
\n Crl.Revision No.276 of 2000                                                4<\/span><\/p>\n
signal was given to the raiding party. As per agreed signal by the bogus<\/p>\n
punter, raid was conducted. Purchi signed by the petitioner was recovered<\/p>\n
from the bogus punter. Marked currency note was recovered from the<\/p>\n
petitioner. That means the bogus punter as per direction of the IO had<\/p>\n
staked the marked currency note at No.75. Evidence on file was rightly<\/p>\n
scrutinized.\n<\/p>\n
               I have gone through the evidence on file but evidence on file<\/p>\n
was not properly scrutinized by the trial Court as well as the First Appellate<\/p>\n
Court. According to the story, police party headed by HC Gurmel Singh<\/p>\n
had received secret information that the petitioner was playing the game of<\/p>\n
darra satta while present near Sabzi Mandi, Bassi Pathana. But on receipt of<\/p>\n
secret information, ruqa was not sent to the Police Station. After receipt of<\/p>\n
secret information, marked currency note of Rs.5\/- was handed over to PHC<\/p>\n
Sawinder Singh, but no one was directed to act as a shadow witness.<\/p>\n
Shadow witness was to join to hear the conversation amongst the petitioner<\/p>\n
and bogus punter while staking marked currency note on a particular<\/p>\n
number and whether the petitioner had promised to pay 80 times the amount<\/p>\n
staked. Link evidence is missing as to what had uttered by the petitioner;<\/p>\n
whether bogus punter had staked marked currency note at No.75 and after<\/p>\n
staking marked currency note, whether the petitioner had promised to pay<\/p>\n
80 times if No.75 was the successful.<\/span><\/p>\n
               In Tarsem Lal’s case (supra), it has been held as under:-<\/p>\n
               “Public Gambling Act<\/a> (III of 1867) Section 13- Sata gambling-<\/p>\n
               even   entry   of stakes    on   a chit,   whether    gambling-\n<\/p>\n
               Uncorroborated evidence of decoy punter-Conviction cannot be<\/p>\n
               based on his evidence.\n<\/p>\n
 Crl.Revision No.276 of 2000                                             5<\/span><\/p>\n
\n
           The petitioner was standing near a Petrol Pump when a decoy<\/p>\n
           punter of the police gave him one rupee currency note for<\/p>\n
           staking on certain numbers. The petitioner entered on a chit the<\/p>\n
           alleged stakes. It is contended that the prosecution evidence<\/p>\n
           did not disclose the modus operandi adopted by the petitioner<\/p>\n
           for the purpose of gambling and further the petitioner did not<\/p>\n
           accept the bet himself, but he was to get commission only.<\/p>\n
           Held, that these facts do not constitute the offence under<\/p>\n
           Section 13<\/a> of the Public Gambling Act. At best it was merely a<\/p>\n
           preparation which is not culpable, and it is not understood as to<\/p>\n
           how merely entering       on a chit the alleged stakes could<\/p>\n
           constitute gambling as envisaged under Section 13<\/a> of the<\/p>\n
           Public Gambling Act. Nor on the uncorroborative evidence of<\/p>\n
           decoy punter any conviction could be sustained.”\n<\/p>\n
           In Gainda Ram’s case (supra), the Hon’ble Court has held as<\/p>\n
under:-\n<\/p>\n
            “Held, in the Public Gambling Act<\/a>, 1867 there is no definition<\/p>\n
            of the `gaming’, but Punjab Act<\/a> 1 of 1929 in Section 1<\/a> did give<\/p>\n
            an inclusive definition of this term but at that time it did not<\/p>\n
            include wagering or betting on any figures or numbers or dates<\/p>\n
            to be subsequently ascertained or disclosed. The definition of<\/p>\n
            the term was amended by Section 2<\/a> of the Punjab Act 9 of<\/p>\n
            1960 and the definition now includes in the term `gaming’,<\/p>\n
            wagering or betting on any figures or numbers or dates to be<\/p>\n
            subsequently ascertained or disclosed, as such Tarsem Lal’s<\/p>\n
            case was decided before the amending Punjab Act<\/a> 9 of 1960
\n Crl.Revision No.276 of 2000                                              6<\/span><\/p>\n
              and consequently is not a precedent for cases decided after the<\/p>\n
              coming into force of the amendments brought about by Punjab<\/p>\n
              Act<\/a> 9 of 1960. This has been approved by a Division Bench in<\/p>\n
              State V. Jai Kishan, Criminal Appeal No.1195 of 1961,<\/p>\n
              decided on October 25, 1962, and has also been followed in<\/p>\n
              Mulkh Raj V. State, Criminal Revision No.649 of 1961,<\/p>\n
              decided on October 16, 1961, and Brij Kishore v. State,<\/p>\n
              Criminal Revision No.57 of 1962 decided on July 30, 1962.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n
             In the present case, evidence is missing as to what were the<\/p>\n
terms and conditions regarding payment of 80 times of the staked amount.<\/p>\n
Place of recovery was a thoroughfare.          Independent witnesses were<\/p>\n
available but no one was joined without any reason.        Evidence simply<\/p>\n
shows that marked Rs.5\/- currency note was handed over to PHG Sawinder<\/p>\n
Singh and he was directed to stake the marked currency note at No.75 and<\/p>\n
gave agreed signal to the raiding party. That means PHG Sawinder Singh<\/p>\n
was acting as bogus punter as well as shadow witness. But no evidence is<\/p>\n
on the file as to whether PHG Sawinder Singh is telling the truth or not. To<\/p>\n
corroborate the statement of PHG Sawinder Singh, statement of shadow<\/p>\n
witness was the corroborative piece of evidence.\n<\/p>\n
             In defence, the petitioner has examined two witnesses and their<\/p>\n
statements seem to be reasonable one. Defence version seems to be more<\/p>\n
probable than the prosecution story.\n<\/p>\n
             No other submission was put forward. All the discussed above<\/p>\n
shows that the evidence on file was not properly scrutinized by the trial<\/p>\n
Court as well as First Appellate Court. The impugned judgment suffers from<\/p>\n
illegality and infirmity.\n<\/p>\n
 Crl.Revision No.276 of 2000                                                 7<\/span><\/p>\n
\n
             In the light of above discussion, the impugned judgment is set<\/p>\n
aside and the petitioner is acquitted of the charge levelled against him.<\/p>\n
             The revision is allowed accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
3.9.2009                                               ( JORA SINGH )\npk                                                         JUDGE\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Amar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 September, 2009 Crl.Revision No.276 of 2000 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.Rev.No.276 of 2000 Date of decision: 3.9.2009 Amar Singh … Petitioner versus State of Punjab … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH. Present: Mr.Paramjit Batta, Advocate, […]<\/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":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-262466","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAmar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 September, 2009 - 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\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Amar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-09-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-11T02:10:54+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\\\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Amar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 September, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-11T02:10:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1622,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009\",\"name\":\"Amar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-11T02:10:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Amar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 September, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Amar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 September, 2009 - 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\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Amar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-09-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-11T02:10:54+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\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Amar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 September, 2009","datePublished":"2009-09-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-11T02:10:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009"},"wordCount":1622,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009","name":"Amar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-09-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-11T02:10:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amar-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-on-3-september-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Amar Singh vs State Of Punjab on 3 September, 2009"}]},{"@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\/262466","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=262466"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/262466\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=262466"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=262466"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=262466"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}