{"id":31151,"date":"2011-07-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-07-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011"},"modified":"2017-01-29T10:07:54","modified_gmt":"2017-01-29T04:37:54","slug":"rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011","title":{"rendered":"Rajendra Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 7 July, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Rajendra Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 7 July, 2011<\/div>\n<pre>         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI\n                                Cr. M.P. No.534 of 2008\n\nRajendra Pandey-- --            --     --      --      --   ---      --    --Petitioner\n                                       Versus\n1. The State of Jharkhand\n2. Shatrughan Pathak--          --     --      --      --   -- --    --    --Opposite Parties\n\n       CORAM           :        THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.K. SINHA\n\nFor the Petitioner         : Mr. P.P.N. Roy, Sr. Advocate &amp;\n                              Mr. Satya Prakash Sinha, Advocate\n\nFor the State              : Mrs. Nitu Sinha, A.P.P.\n                                        -----\n\nReserved on: 5-5-2011                                  Pronounced on: 07 - 07-2011\n\n\n\nD.K. Sinha, J.         The petitioner has invoked the inherent power of this Court for\n                quashment of his entire criminal proceeding and the First Information\n                Report (FIR) with respect to Khunti P.S. Case No. 83\/2006, corresponding\n                to G.R. No.412\/2006 for the alleged offence under Sections 409, 420 and\n                120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, pending before the Additional Chief\n                Judicial Magistrate, Khunti.\n                       2.       Prosecution story in short was that Shri Shatrughan Pathak,\n                the Deputy Director, Welfare, South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi,\n                presented a written report before the officer-in-charge of Khunti police\n                station narrating therein that the Tribal Welfare Commissioner, Ranchi\n                conducted spot inspection on 31.1.2006 of the various projects being\n                Project Nos. 15\/2005-06, 10\/2005-06, 8\/2005-06, 7\/2005-06, 6\/2005-06\n                and 1\/2005-06 under Khunti MESO Area and reported that the agent of\n                the projects Shri Rajendra Pandey, Junior Engineer, MESO Area, Khunti\n                i.e. the petitioner herein, had withdrawn advance of Rs.7500\/- in each of\n                the projects on 5.4.2005 and without doing measurement of the work\n                done, again withdrew the second instalment of Rs.60,000\/-, Rs.70,000\/-\n                and Rs.80,000\/- in one or other projects. It was further alleged in the\n                written report that as per inquiry report, about Rs.30,000\/- to Rs.40,000\/-\n                were embezzled         in each of the six projects, referred to above and\n                accordingly, under the instruction of the Secretary, Welfare Department,\n                Government of Jharkhand, FIR was directed to be lodged against the\n                petitioner Rajendra Pandey, Junior Engineer for legal action.\n                       3.       Learned senior counsel Mr.          P.P.N. Roy, at the outset,\n                submitted that for the same charge, a departmental proceeding was\n                initiated against the petitioner and after inquiry, a report was submitted to\n                the Government and the Government after having been satisfied with the\n report of the inquiry officer, exonerated the petitioner from all the charges,\nwhich were levelled against him by the order dated 17.3.2008 with the\ncopy of the said order forwarded to the petitioner vide memo No.722 dated\n17.3.2008<\/pre>\n<p> (Annexure-2) on the basis of which he was promoted to the<br \/>\npost of Assistant Engineer, Irrigation Department, Government of<br \/>\nJharkhand, Ranchi.\n<\/p>\n<p>       4.      Mr. Roy, the learned senior counsel, further explained with<br \/>\nreference to Annexure-2 of the petition, referred to hereinabove, that as<br \/>\nmany as four charges were framed against the petitioner             Rajendra<br \/>\nPandey in the departmental proceeding, almost with the similar allegation<br \/>\nthat was made in the FIR, but the inquiry report indicated that none of the<br \/>\ncharges could be established against him and therefore, the Deputy<br \/>\nSecretary of the Government of Jharkhand under the instruction of the<br \/>\nGovernment observed that after scrutiny of the entire allegations and the<br \/>\ncharges levelled against the petitioner , the charges were found not<br \/>\nproved and hence, he was exonerated from all the charges.\n<\/p>\n<p>       5.     The learned senior counsel explained that an identical issue<br \/>\ncame up for consideration before the Supreme Court in P.S. Rajya versus<br \/>\nState of Bihar, reported in 1996 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 897, wherein<br \/>\nthe Apex Court observed,<br \/>\n                     &#8220;At the outset we may point out that the learned<br \/>\n       counsel for the respondent could not but accept the position<br \/>\n       that the standard of proof required to establish the guilt in a<br \/>\n       criminal case is far higher than the standard of proof required to<br \/>\n       establish the guilt in the departmental proceedings. He also<br \/>\n       accepted that in the present case, the charge in the<br \/>\n       departmental proceedings and in the criminal proceedings is<br \/>\n       one and the same. He did not dispute the findings rendered in<br \/>\n       the departmental proceedings and the ultimate result of it. On<br \/>\n       these premises, if we proceed further then there is no difficulty<br \/>\n       in accepting the case of the appellant. For if the charge which is<br \/>\n       identical could not be established in a departmental<br \/>\n       proceedings and in view of the admitted discrepancies in the<br \/>\n       reports submitted by the valuers one wonders what is there<br \/>\n       further to proceed against the appellant in criminal<br \/>\n       proceedings.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>              The Apex Court further observed,<br \/>\n                      &#8220;At the risk of repetition, we may state that the<br \/>\n       charge had not been proved and on that basis the appellant<br \/>\n       was cleared of departmental enquiry. In this connection, we<br \/>\n       may also usefully cite a decision of this Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/1033637\/\">State of<br \/>\n       Haryana v. Bhajan Lal. This Court<\/a> after considering almost all<br \/>\n       earlier decisions has given guidelines relating to the exercise of<br \/>\n       the extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution or<br \/>\n       the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal<br \/>\n       Procedure for quashing an FIR or a complaint. This Court<br \/>\n       observed as follows: (SCC pp. 378-79, paras 102-3)<br \/>\n                                 &#8220;In the backdrop of the interpretation of<br \/>\n          the various relevant provisions of the Code under Chapter<br \/>\n          XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a<br \/>\n          series of decisions relating to the exercise of the<br \/>\n extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent<br \/>\npowers under Section 482 of the Code which we have<br \/>\nextracted and reproduced above, we give the following<br \/>\ncategories of cases by way of illustration wherein such<br \/>\npower could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the<br \/>\nprocess of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of<br \/>\njustice, though it may not be possible to lay down any<br \/>\nprecise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and<br \/>\ninflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an<br \/>\nexhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases wherein such power<br \/>\nshould be exercised.\n<\/p>\n<p>                            (1) Where the allegations made in<br \/>\n      the first information report or the complaint, even if they<br \/>\n      are taken at their face value and accepted in their<br \/>\n      entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or<br \/>\n      make out a case against the accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>                            (2) Where the allegations in the<br \/>\n      first information report and other materials, if any,<br \/>\n      accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable<br \/>\n      offence, justifying an investigation by police officers<br \/>\n      under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an<br \/>\n      order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section<br \/>\n      155(2) of the Code.\n<\/p>\n<p>                            (3) Where the uncontroverted<br \/>\n      allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the<br \/>\n      evidence collected in support of the same do not<br \/>\n      disclose the commission of any offence and make out a<br \/>\n      case against the accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>                            (4) Where, the allegations in the<br \/>\n      FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but<br \/>\n      constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no<br \/>\n      investigation is permitted by a police officer without an<br \/>\n      order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section<br \/>\n      155(2) of the Code.\n<\/p>\n<p>                            (5) Where the allegations made in<br \/>\n      the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently<br \/>\n      improbable on the basis of which no prudent person<br \/>\n      can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient<br \/>\n      ground for proceedings against the accused.\n<\/p>\n<p>                            (6) Where there is an express legal<br \/>\n      bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or<br \/>\n      the Act concerned (under which a criminal proceeding<br \/>\n      is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the<br \/>\n      proceedings and\/or where there is a specific provision<br \/>\n      in the Code or the Act concerned, providing efficacious<br \/>\n      redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.\n<\/p>\n<p>                            (7) Where a criminal proceeding is<br \/>\n      manifestly attended with mala fide and\/or where the<br \/>\n      proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior<br \/>\n      motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and<br \/>\n      with a view to spite him due to private and personal<br \/>\n      grudge.\n<\/p>\n<p>                       We also give a note of caution to the<br \/>\neffect that the power of quashing a criminal proceeding<br \/>\nshould be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection<br \/>\nand that too in the rarest of rare cases; that the court will not<br \/>\nbe justified in embarking upon an enquiry as to the reliability<br \/>\nor genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in the<br \/>\nFIR or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent<br \/>\npowers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the court to<br \/>\nact according to its whim or caprice.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>         6.      A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State-<br \/>\nopposite party contending, inter alia, that during course of investigation, it<br \/>\ncould be gathered that most of the work was done through machine<br \/>\ninstead of manual labour and in this regard, a letter was sent to the<br \/>\nSpecial Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Government of Jharkhand<br \/>\nfor sending the concerned file as required for verification but the required<br \/>\nfile was never sent to the Investigating Officer and therefore, the<br \/>\ninvestigation was pending. State-opposite party admitted that the<br \/>\npetitioner herein was exonerated in the departmental proceeding but<br \/>\ninvestigation in criminal case was still pending against him and reliance<br \/>\nhas been placed on the principle laid down in      P.S. Rajya&#8217;s case (supra)<br \/>\nwherein it was observed that the standard of proof required to establish<br \/>\nthe guilt in a criminal case is far higher than the standard of proof required<br \/>\nto establish the guilt in the departmental proceedings and hence, the<br \/>\npetitioner, who was the Junior Engineer, cannot be exonerated from his<br \/>\ncriminal liability.\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.      I find that the State-opposite party has not completed the<br \/>\nobservation, which has been made by the Apex Court in P.S. Rajya&#8217;s case<br \/>\n(supra) wherein the part of the observation referred to in the counter<br \/>\naffidavit was completed with further observation, &#8220;the charge in the<br \/>\ndepartmental proceedings and in the criminal proceedings is one and the<br \/>\nsame. He did not dispute the findings rendered in the departmental<br \/>\nproceedings and the ultimate result of it. On these premises, if we proceed<br \/>\nfurther then there is no difficulty in accepting the case of the appellant. For<br \/>\nif the charge which is identical could not be established in a departmental<br \/>\nproceedings and in view of the admitted discrepancies in the reports<br \/>\nsubmitted by the valuers one wonders what is there further to proceed<br \/>\nagainst the appellant in criminal proceedings.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>        8.      I find that the State-opposite party has admitted that the<br \/>\npetitioner, the then Junior Engineer has been exonerated from all the four<br \/>\ncharges, which were framed against him during his departmental<br \/>\nproceeding, which were of much relevance of the offences alleged in the<br \/>\nFIR. I find that the petitioner has been promoted to the post of Assistant<br \/>\nEngineer in the Irrigation Department of the Government of Jharkhand and<br \/>\nthereby, he has attained the higher post of a public servant. Relying upon<br \/>\nthe P.S. Rajya&#8217;s case (supra) and following the principles laid down<br \/>\ntherein, I find that the criminal proceeding of the petitioner Rajendra<br \/>\nPandey would tantamount to misuse of the process of the Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>        9.      For the reasons discussed above, this petition is allowed and<br \/>\nthe criminal proceedings of the petitioner Rajendra Pandey, arising out of<br \/>\nKhunti P.S. Case No. 83\/2006, corresponding to G.R. No.412\/2006<br \/>\nincluding the FIR is quashed.\n<\/p>\n<p>               (D.K. Sinha, J.)<br \/>\nS.B.\/A.F.R.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jharkhand High Court Rajendra Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 7 July, 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr. M.P. No.534 of 2008 Rajendra Pandey&#8211; &#8212; &#8212; &#8212; &#8212; &#8212; &#8212; &#8212; &#8211;Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Shatrughan Pathak&#8211; &#8212; &#8212; &#8212; &#8212; &#8212; &#8212; &#8212; &#8211;Opposite Parties [&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":[8,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-31151","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Rajendra Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 7 July, 2011 - 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\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Rajendra Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 7 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011\" \/>\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=\"2011-07-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-29T04:37:54+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=\"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\\\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Rajendra Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 7 July, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-07-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-29T04:37:54+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011\"},\"wordCount\":1440,\"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\\\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011\",\"name\":\"Rajendra Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 7 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-07-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-29T04:37:54+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Rajendra Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 7 July, 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":"Rajendra Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 7 July, 2011 - 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\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Rajendra Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 7 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-07-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-29T04:37:54+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Rajendra Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 7 July, 2011","datePublished":"2011-07-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-29T04:37:54+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011"},"wordCount":1440,"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\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011","name":"Rajendra Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 7 July, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-07-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-29T04:37:54+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/rajendra-pandey-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-7-july-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Rajendra Pandey vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors. on 7 July, 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\/31151","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=31151"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/31151\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=31151"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=31151"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=31151"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}