{"id":29645,"date":"2011-09-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-08-31T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011"},"modified":"2015-09-21T18:42:15","modified_gmt":"2015-09-21T13:12:15","slug":"amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011","title":{"rendered":"Amarjeet Singh & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n
Amarjeet Singh & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2011<\/div>\n
                  Cr. Appeal D.B. No. 464 of 2002\n       Against the Judgment of conviction and order of Sentence\n       dated 11.07.2002 respectively, passed by learned Additional\n       District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no. II,\n       Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum, in Sessions Trial No. 211 of\n       2000.\n\n       1.   Amarjeet Singh @ Ambe\n       2.   Paramjeet Singh @ Pamme.\n       3.   Prem Singh @ Pammi.\n       4.   Gurnam Singh ( died during pendency of the appeal)\n                                                    ..Appellants\n                                  Versus\n       The State of Jharkhand                    ..........Respondent\n       For the Appellants       : Mr. Ajit Kumar, Advocate\n       For the State            : APP\n                                       ------\n<\/pre>\n
                                PRESENT
\n                  The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.K. Merathia
\n                  The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P.P. Bhatt.\n<\/p>\n
                            ——–\n<\/p>\n
       C.A.V. On 24.8.2011                       Delivered on 1\/9\/2011\n\n\nR.K.Merathia, J         This appeal is directed against the judgment of\n<\/pre>\n
       conviction and order of sentence dated 11.07.2002, passed by
\n       learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no. II,
\n       Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum, in Sessions Trial No. 211 of 2000,
\n       convicting the appellant nos. 1 to 3 under section 302\/34 of IPC and
\n       appellant no. 4 under section 302\/109 of the IPC and sentencing
\n       them to undergo imprisonment for life.\n<\/p>\n
       2.   The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant-Paramjeet
\n       Singh @ Lucky ( P.W-9) gave a fardbeyan ( Ext-3) before the police
\n       on 8.11.1999 at 6    P.M. in Tata Medical Hospital ( TMH), Jamshedpur
\n       to the effect that at about 3.30 P.M. he and his elder brother-Satnam
\n       Singh ( deceased) were sitting along with others on the “Chabutra” of
\n       the Chakki Mill situated behind Kali Puja Pandal at Tulsi Chowk of No.
\n       10 Basti. In the meantime, the appellants, residents of the same
\n       Basti, came with swords in their hands and started assaulting the
\n       deceased. Appellant nos. 1, 2 and 3 assaulted by swords on the face,
\n       head and other parts of the body repeatedly, due to which, the
\n       deceased fell down on the ground in precarious condition. Appellant
\n                               -2-<\/span>
\nNo. 4 was instigating his sons ( appellant nos. 1, 2 and 3) not to leave
\nthe deceased alive. The deceased had fallen down. Even then he was
\nassaulted with swords. Only when the appellants felt that deceased
\nhad died, they fled away. The mother of P.W-9-namely Gurmeet Kaur
\n( P.W-1) and Bhabhi-Reshma Kaur(P.W-6) also reached there and saw
\nthe occurrence. Other persons of the neighborhood had also seen the
\noccurrence. The informant along with others took the deceased to
\nT.M.H. Hospital for treatment, where he died just before lodging the
\nFIR. It was further alleged that the reason behind the occurrence was
\na quarrel between the deceased and the appellants in the last night
\nand therefore the appellants with common intention have killed the
\ndeceased.\n<\/p>\n
3.    Charges were framed under sections 109 & 302\/34 IPC against
\nappellant no. 4-Gurnam Singh and under section 302\/34 against
\nappellant nos. 1, 2 and 3, to which they pleaded not guilty and
\nclaimed to be tried. Their defence was that they are innocent and
\nhave been falsely implicated in the case.\n<\/p>\n
4.    The   prosecution    has   examined     14   witnesses.   Certain
\ndocuments have also been exhibited. The Material Ext. ( two swords)
\nwas also produced before the trial court.\n<\/p>\n
5.    Learned counsel appearing for the appellants assailed the
\nimpugned judgement on various grounds. He submitted that the
\nprosecution has not proved the motive; the place of occurrence has
\nalso not been clearly established; P.Ws. 1 and 6 claimed tobe eye
\nwitnesses but they are not; independent witnesses were available but
\nonly the interested witnesses have been examined; the prosecution
\nhas not explained the abrasions found by the doctor in the
\npostmortem report; the earliest report about the alleged occurrence
\nhas been suppressed by the prosecution; FIR was lodged before the
\nOfficer in charge Sidhgora Police Station in Tata Main Hospital ( TMH
\nfor short) whereas the police camp was available at the T.M.H. It was
\nlastly submitted that at best the appellants could be convicted under
\nsection 304 Part II IPC.\n<\/p>\n
6.    On the other hand, learned counsel for the State supported the
\nimpugned judgement.\n<\/p>\n
7.    The submissions made on behalf of the appellants are not
\nacceptable for the following reasons.\n<\/p>\n
                               -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
8.    P.W-1-Gurmit Kaur is the mother of the deceased. She inter alia
\nsaid that when she along with her daughter in law (P.W-6-Reshma
\nKaur) were in their house, they heard some “hulla” outside and heard
\nParamjeet Singh crying “Bachao Bachao”; they rushed and saw that
\nthe appellant nos. 1, 2 and 3 were assaulting the deceased with
\nswords and appellant no. 4 was instigating them to kill.\n<\/p>\n
      In cross-examination, she said that a Kali Puja Pandal was near
\nto her house, at about half kilometer. It appears that an attempt was
\nmade to confuse this witness about the place of occurrence.
\nHowever, she said that the occurrence took place at the ‘Chakki’
\nbesides Kali Puja Pandal. Her son Paramjeet Singh (P.W-9) was trying
\nto save the deceased when sword blows were given. Other persons
\nwere also present but no body intervened. P.W-9 took the deceased
\nto hospital. She was weeping and was not her in full senses.\n<\/p>\n
9.    P.W-2-Ganesh Kumar is resident of the same Basti. He inter alia
\nsaid that he saw the occurrence, in which appellant nos. 1, 2 and 3
\nwere assaulting the deceased by swords and appellant no. 4 was
\ninstigating them and that when people assembled, they fled away
\nthrowing swords. At the time of occurrence, P.W-1, 6 and 9 were
\npresent.\n<\/p>\n
      In cross examination, he said that it was seen from the place of
\noccurrence that P.W. 1 was coming from her house. He also tried to
\nsave the deceased. First assault by sword was done suddenly. The
\nappellants threatened this witness of dire consequences if he
\nintervened. Harjeet Singh ( P.W-3) and others took the deceased to
\nthe hospital. The occurrence took place near Kali Puja Pandal. This
\nwitness admitted that he was in jail thrice in connection with arms
\nact case; one ‘Marpit’ case and one ‘Daru wala’ case. Police seized
\nsword from the place of occurrence.\n<\/p>\n
10.   P.W-3-Harjeet Singh is inquest witness. He also said that on
\n“hulla” he came outside of his house and saw that there was crowd
\nand ‘Jhagda’ was going on. He was not in a position to say as to who
\nassaulted to whom and by which weapon, but sword blows were
\nbeing made causing injuries to the deceased who died in the hospital.\n<\/p>\n
11.   P.W-4 is Karnail Singh. He inter alia said that on the date of
\noccurrence he went to meet Surjeet Singh in 10 No. Basti. On “hulla”
\nwhen he reached near the place of occurrence, he saw that three
\npersons were assaulting the deceased by swords and one lady and
\n                                -4-<\/span>
\none boy were crying not to assault. Appellant no. 4 was instigating
\nthe three persons to assault. Appellant nos. 1 to 3 assaulted the
\ndeceased by swords, due to which he sustained injuries and died in
\nthe hospital after about 2-3 hours.\n<\/p>\n
        In cross-examination, he said that he lives at about 5 K.M. from
\nthe place of occurrence. The deceased was his nephew. He said that
\nthere was a “Chakki” near the place of occurrence. There was blood
\non the stairs. The occurrence took place at about \u00bd kilometer from
\nKali Puja Pandal. P.Ws.1 and 9 were already there and were crying.\n<\/p>\n
12.     P.W-5-Billu Agrawal is a hearsay witness, about the occurrence.\n<\/p>\n
13.     P.W-6-Reshma Kaur is the wife of the deceased. She said that
\nwhen she      with P.W.1 were in their house, on ‘Hulla’ of informant,
\nthey rushed running to the place of occurrence. She saw the
\nappellants 1 to 3 assaulting her husband(deceased) by sword.
\nAppellant no. 4 was instigating them. She inter alia said that one of
\nthe appellants fled throwing his sword and other two fled with
\nswords.\n<\/p>\n
        In cross-examination, she said that the place of occurrence is
\nnear Kali Puja Pandal. P.W-4 Karnail Singh is her maternal uncle and
\nhe was also present at the place of occurrence.\n<\/p>\n
14.     P.W-7-Surjeet Singh is resident of the same Basti. He said that
\non ‘Hulla’,    he came out of his house, and then saw that the
\nappellants 1 to 3 were assaulting the deceased by sword. He inter
\nalia said that P.Ws 1, 6 and 9 were also there and were crying not to
\nassault the deceased.\n<\/p>\n
        In cross-examination, he said that the deceased was his cousin.
\nThey live in the same house\/holding number, with partition. At the
\ntime of assault, the deceased could not run away and he was killed
\nwithin 15-20 ft. from Atta Chhaki. The deceased fell down near Aina
\nGodown while running. There, he was again assaulted by sword.
\nThere was blood near Godown of Aina Press. There was also blood
\nnear the stairs in front of the Chakki. From there up to Aina Press,
\nblood was spilled, up to which the deceased could run. The sword
\nblows were given at the chest and there were injuries on the hands
\nalso.\n<\/p>\n
15.     P.W-8-Raj Kumar Sharma is        a hearsay witness, to the
\noccurrence.\n<\/p>\n
                               -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
16.   P.W-9-Paramjeet Singh is the informant. He fully supported the
\nFIR. He inter alia said that on 8.11.1999 at about 3.30, he with his
\nelder brother (deceased) and others were sitting on the Chabutra of
\nChaki. The Ata Chaki is near Tulsi Chowk in 10 No. Basti. The
\nappellant nos. 1, 2 and 3 came. The appellant nos. 1, 2 and 3 came
\nwith swords in their hands. Appellant no. 4 was instigating them to
\nkill. Appellant nos. 1,2 and 3 inflicted sword injuries on the body of
\nthe deceased. On his alarm, P.Ws, 1, 4, 6, 7 and others reached at
\nthe place of occurrence. This witness further said that on receiving
\ninjury, the deceased started running and he fell in front of Aina Press,
\nwhere, again he was assaulted. When people assembled, appellants
\nfled away. The deceased was taken to T.M.H. where he died after
\nabout 1 and \u00bd hours. The reason for incident was that in the previous
\nnight, there was some quarrel between the appellants and the
\ndeceased. The deceased was a convoy driver.\n<\/p>\n
      In his cross-examination, he said that out of several other
\npersons, only Ganesh Kumar ( P.W-2) is a witness in this case. There
\nwas no sword in hand of appellant no. 4-Gurnam Singh.\n<\/p>\n
17.   P.W-10-Parsuram Paswan is the Investigating Officer. He
\ndescribed the place of occurrence. He found blood at the place of
\noccurrence. He also found two sharp edged swords, which have been
\nmarked as material Exts.1 and 1\/1. On the swords, there was no
\nblood stains and there was rust. This witness also said that the house
\nof the deceased is about 100 yards from the place of occurrence. He
\nhas marked a portion of the case diary as Ext.-A. In his cross-
\nexamination, he said that he did not seize blood stained soil.\n<\/p>\n
18.   P.W-11-   Akhilesh   Kumar    is   the   Doctor   who   conducted
\npostmortem. He found the following injuries.\n<\/p>\n
      Abrasions on knee, leg, arm and forearm etc. (He proved the
\npostmortem report Ext-7). He found 14 incised wounds on vital parts
\nof the body such as face and head including three injuries over palm,
\nthumb and fingers. Doctor opined that the said injuries were ante
\nmortem. The abrasions were caused by hard and blunt substance
\nand incised wounds were caused by heavy sharp cutting weapons.
\nThe death was due to head and facial injuries.\n<\/p>\n
19.   P.Ws.-12 and 13- namely S. Shankar Ray and Kamaljeet Singh
\nare witnesses to the seizure of two swords.\n<\/p>\n
20.   P.W-14-Rakesh Kumar is witness to the Fardbeyan.\n<\/p>\n
                               -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
21.      Two swords were marked as material exhibits 1 and 1\/1. The
\nFardbeyan is Ext-3. Formal FIR is Ext-4. Inquest Report is Ext-5.
\nSeizure list is Ext-6 and the Postmortem Report is Ext-7 along with
\nsignatures of the witnesses thereon.\n<\/p>\n
22.   The defence exhibited the information sent to the police by the
\nHospital          ( Ext-A).\n<\/p>\n
23.   Motive- The prosecution has proved that the motive behind the
\noccurrence was some quarrel between the deceased and the
\nappellants in the previous night. Moreover, as the eye witnesses have
\nproved the prosecution case, the question of motive takes back
\nstage.\n<\/p>\n
24.   Eye Witnesses- The relative eye witnesses P.Ws, 1, 4, 6, 7 and
\n9 cannot be brushed aside only because they are related to the
\ndeceased. They have stood the test of cross-examination and have
\nfully supported the prosecution case. Apart from them, P.W-2-Ganesh
\nKumar is an independent eye witness. He also proved presence of
\nother eye witnesses. It appears that on being asked, he said that he
\nwas in jail thrice in connection with three cases under Arms Act, in a
\ncase of ‘Marpit’ and in a case of liquor but for that, his evidence
\ncannot be discarded.\n<\/p>\n
      P.W-3 though admitted that he is a relative of the deceased but
\nhe did not project himself as eye witness. If the prosecution wanted,
\nit could project him also as an eye witness.\n<\/p>\n
      About P.W-4-Karnail Singh, it is said that he lives at a far away
\nplace and he became chance witness only because he is a relative of
\nthe deceased, but this witness said that he came to meet P.W-7 on
\n8.11.1999 in 10 No. Basti. He heard ‘Hulla’ near Tulsi Chowk where
\nhe found that appellant nos. 1,2 and 3 were assaulting the deceased
\nby sword who ultimately died after 2 1\/2-3 hours in hospital.\n<\/p>\n
      It was contended that P.Ws. 1 & 6 could not hear the hulla\/cry
\nand could not be eye witness as P.W. 1 said that the distance
\nbetween her house and the place of occurrence was about \u00bd K.M.
\nP.W. 1 is a rustic house wife. The Investigating Officer said that such
\ndistance was about 100 yards. P.W. 2 said that from the place of
\noccurrence, it was visible that P.W.-1 was coming from her house.
\nP.W. 1 & 6 said that they came running at the place of occurrence.\n<\/p>\n
25.   Place of occurrence-    The witnesses have consistently proved
\nthe place of occurrence. It may be noted here that P.W-7 stated in his
\n                               -7-<\/span>
\nevidence that the deceased while being inflicted by sword injuries
\ncould not run and he fell within 15-20 ft. and blood spilled at the
\nplaces the deceased was assaulted and he tried to run and fell.
\nP.W-9 also said that on receiving injuries, the deceased started
\nrunning and fell in front of Aina Press. Thus, it appears that the place
\nof occurrence is spread between the places where the deceased was
\nassaulted, he ran for his life; he fell on the ground; and where he was
\nagain assaulted. This position also find support from the postmortem
\nreport in which abrasions on knee, leg, arms and forearms and three
\nincised injuries on palm, thumb and fingers were found, which the
\ndeceased must have received while trying to run and save himself.
\nThus, it is not possible to accept the contention of the appellants that
\nthe place of occurrence has not been proved by the prosecution.\n<\/p>\n
26.   On the first information received by the police- It appears from
\nparagraph 3 of the case diary that at about 4 P.M. on 8.11.1999, the
\ntelephonic information was received that some untoward incident
\nhad taken place in 10 No. Basti near Kali Puja Pandal at Tulsi Chwok,
\nwhich was registered as Station Diary No. 186 dated 8.11.1999 and
\nthe police proceeded towards the place of occurrence. Such vague
\ninformation on telephone cannot be treated tobe first information
\nand it cannot be said that the prosecution has suppressed the first
\ninformation. It further appears that on such information, police
\nreached at the place of occurrence and then at TMH and therefore
\nthe fardbeyan was recorded before the officer in charge at ‘Camp
\nTMH’. It further appears that immediately on the death of injured,
\nthe FIR was lodged.\n<\/p>\n
27.   The submissions for converting the conviction under section
\n304 Part II IPC is also not acceptable. There was some quarrel in the
\nprevious night of the occurrence, and not at the time of occurrence.
\nThe appellants came prepared with swords. They assaulted the
\ndeceased indiscriminately by swords causing about 13 incised
\ninjuries on him. The incised injuries on palm, thumb and fingers
\nindicate that the deceased tried to save himself. The abrasions
\ncorroborate the evidence that he tried to run for life and fell. On
\nconsidering the entire material, it is not possible to convert the
\nconviction into Section 304 Part II IPC, as this case does not fall
\nwithin Exception 4 of Section 300 IPC.\n<\/p>\n
                                   -8-<\/span><\/p>\n
28.             It may be noted here that the Doctor found 5 abrasions
\ncaused by hard & blunt substance and 13 incised injuries caused by
\nheavy sharp cutting weapon, on the body of the deceased which
\nincludes about 4 injuries on head and 5 on face. Such injuries could
\nnot be caused by one accused. Otherwise also Section 34 IPC is
\nattracted in this case.\n<\/p>\n
29.       Thus the prosecution has fully proved it’s case against the
\nappellants. There is no reason for false implication. Some minor
\ncontradictions were pointed out, but on those, the prosecution case
\ncannot be brushed aside.\n<\/p>\n
          (Learned counsel for the appellants did not press this appeal on
\nbehalf of appellant no. 4, saying that he died during pendency of the
\nappeal. )\n<\/p>\n
30.       Learned trial court, did not impose fine. Learned counsel for the
\nappellants was noticed and heard on this aspect.\n<\/p>\n
31.       In the result, this appeal is dismissed. However, a token fine of
\nRs.1000\/- is also imposed on appellants 1, 2 and 3, and in default,
\nthey will undergo simple imprisonment of one month.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n\n                                                    ( R.K. Merathia, J)\n\n\nI agree\n\n\n( P.P. Bhatt, J)                                       ( P.P. Bhatt, J)\n\n\nJharkhand High Court, Ranchi\nDated the 1st September, 2011\n      \/\nRakesh NAFR\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Jharkhand High Court Amarjeet Singh & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2011 Cr. Appeal D.B. No. 464 of 2002 Against the Judgment of conviction and order of Sentence dated 11.07.2002 respectively, passed by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no. II, Jamshedpur, East Singhbhum, in Sessions Trial No. 211 […]<\/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":[8,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-29645","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nAmarjeet Singh & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2011 - 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\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Amarjeet Singh & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-09-21T13:12:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"14 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Amarjeet Singh & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-21T13:12:15+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011\"},\"wordCount\":2767,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jharkhand High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011\",\"name\":\"Amarjeet Singh & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-08-31T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-21T13:12:15+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Amarjeet Singh & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2011\"}]},{\"@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":"Amarjeet Singh & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2011 - 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\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Amarjeet Singh & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-09-21T13:12:15+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"14 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Amarjeet Singh & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2011","datePublished":"2011-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-21T13:12:15+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011"},"wordCount":2767,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jharkhand High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011","name":"Amarjeet Singh & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-08-31T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-21T13:12:15+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/amarjeet-singh-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-1-september-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Amarjeet Singh & Ors. vs State Of Jharkhand on 1 September, 2011"}]},{"@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\/29645","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=29645"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29645\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29645"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29645"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29645"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}