{"id":33719,"date":"1960-11-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1960-11-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960"},"modified":"2015-12-10T15:28:08","modified_gmt":"2015-12-10T09:58:08","slug":"pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960","title":{"rendered":"Pratap Singh vs The State Of Vindhya Pradesh (Now … on 18 November, 1960"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Pratap Singh vs The State Of Vindhya Pradesh (Now … on 18 November, 1960<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1961 AIR 586, \t\t 1961 SCR (2) 509<\/div>\n
Author: S J Imam<\/div>\n
Bench: Imam, Syed Jaffer, Kapur, J.L., Gupta, K.C. Das, Dayal, Raghubar, Ayyangar, N. Rajagopala<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nPRATAP SINGH\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE STATE OF VINDHYA PRADESH (NOW MADHYA PRADESH)\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n18\/11\/1960\n\nBENCH:\nIMAM, SYED JAFFER\nBENCH:\nIMAM, SYED JAFFER\nKAPUR, J.L.\nGUPTA, K.C. DAS\nDAYAL, RAGHUBAR\nAYYANGAR, N. RAJAGOPALA\n\nCITATION:\n 1961 AIR  586\t\t  1961 SCR  (2) 509\n\n\nACT:\nCriminal Procedure-Right of Appeal-Procedure when  appellant\nin  jail-If discriminatory-Finality of order on\t appeal-Code\nof  Criminal Procedure 1898 (V of 1898) ss. 420,  421,\t430-\nConstitution of India Art. 14.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe appellant filed an appeal while he was in jail which was\nsummarily dismissed on merits.\tThereafter lie filed a Memo-\nrandum of Appeal through a pleader which was rejected on the\nground that it was not maintainable owing to his appeal from\njail  under S. 420 of the Code of Criminal Procedure  having\nbeen  dismissed\t earlier.  His review  petition\t before\t the\njudicial Commissioner was also dismissed but his prayer\t for\ncertificate under Art. 132(1) was granted.\nThe  question  was whether S. 421 of the  Code\tof  Criminal\nProcedure  which enables a court to dismiss an appeal  filed\nby a convicted person, while he was in jail, without hearing\nhim offended against Art. 14 of the Constitution.\nHeld,  that  the Code of Criminal Procedure  in\t giving\t the\nright  of appeal in Ch.\t XXXI based it on  a  classification\nwhich was rational and reasonably connected with the  object\nthe  Legislature had in view in enacting that chapter.\t The\nposition of a convicted person in jail, and therefore unable\nto present an appeal either in person or through a  pleader,\nwas entirely different and distinct from that of a convicted\nperson who was able to do so.  The Proviso to s. 421 of\t the\nCode  of  Criminal Procedure in no way offends\tagainst\t the\nprovisions of Art. 14 of the Constitution.\nHeld,  also, that a second appeal from the same judgment  of\nconviction presented through a pleader was not\tmaintainable\nbecause the previous order dismissing the first appeal under\nS. 420 presented from jail was lawful and final under S. 430\nof the Code.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION.  Criminal Appeal No. 106 of
\n1956.\n<\/p>\n
 Appeal\t from  the Judgment and Order dated the\t 7th  April,
\n1956, of the former Judicial Commissioner’s
\n65<\/span>
\n510<\/span>
\nCourt, Vindhya Pradesh, Rewa in Misc.  Crl.  Application No.
\n70 of 1956.\n<\/p>\n
A.   D. Mathur for the Appellant.\n<\/p>\n
B.   K. B. Naidu and I. N. Shroff for the Respondent.
\n1960.  November 18.  The Judgment of the Court was delivered
\nby
\nIMAM,  J.-The  Judicial\t Commissioner  of  Vindhya   Pradesh
\ngranted a certificate under Art. 132(1) of the\tConstitution
\nof  India as in his opinion the case involved a\t substantial
\nquestion   of\tlaw  as\t to  the   interpretation   of\t the
\nConstitution.  Hence the present appeal.\n<\/p>\n
The appellant was convicted under s. 307, Indian Penal\tCode
\nand s. 19(f) of the Indian Arms Act by the Sessions Judge of
\nChatarpur.    He  was  sentenced  to  10   years’   rigorous
\nimprisonment under s. 307, Indian Penal Code and to 3 years’
\nrigorous imprisonment under s. 19(f) of the Indian Arms Act.
\nHe filed an appeal while he was in jail which was  summarily
\ndismissed  on  merits on October 28, 1955.   Thereafter,  on
\nOctober 31, 1955, he filed a Memorandum of Appeal through  a
\npleader\t which\twas  rejected on November 1,  1955,  on\t the
\nground that it was not maintainable owing to his appeal from
\njail  under s. 420 of the Code of Criminal Procedure  having
\nbeen dismissed on October 28, 1955.\n<\/p>\n
Thereafter,   he  filed\t a  petition  before  the   Judicial
\nCommissioner   that  the  order\t dated\tOctober\t 28,   1955,
\ndismissing  his appeal from jail should be reviewed and\t his
\nappeal should be reheard on merits.  This petition was\talso
\ndismissed  by the Judicial Commissioner.  The appellant\t had
\nprayed\tfor a certificate under Arts. 132 and 134(c) of\t the
\nConstitution.  The Judicial Commissioner was of the  opinion
\nthat  no  ground  had  been  established  for  grant  of   a
\ncertificate under Art. 134(c) but a certificate should issue
\nunder Art. 132(1).\n<\/p>\n
The  only  question  for determination\tin  this  appeal  is
\nwhether the case involves any substantial question of law as
\nto the interpretation of the Constitution.  It
\n511<\/span>
\nhad been urged before the Judicial Commissioner that s.\t 421
\nof  the Code of Criminal Procedure which enabled a court  to
\ndismiss an appeal filed by a convicted person, while he\t was
\nin jail, without hearing him offended against Art. 14 of the
\nConstitution as it discriminated between him and a convicted
\nperson who presented his appeal either in person or  through
\na pleader.\n<\/p>\n
Before\twe  consider  whether s. 421  of  the  Code  offends
\nagainst the provisions of Art. 14 of the Constitution it  is
\ndesirable  to  set out shortly the scheme of  appeals  under
\nChapter\t XXXI of the Code of Criminal Procedure\t before\t its
\namendment  which  came\tinto force  in\t1956.\tSection\t 404
\nexpressly states that no appeal shall lie from any  judgment
\nor  order of a criminal court except as provided for by\t the
\nCode or by any other law for the time being in force.\tThis
\nprovision  is in accordance with the general principle\tthat
\nno  appeal  lies as a matter of right unless  the  right  of
\nappeal is conferred by law.  There are various provisions in
\nChapter XXXI providing for an appeal from various orders and
\nsentences  passed  by  the  Criminal  courts.\tSection\t 410
\nenables\t any person convicted at a trial held by a  Sessions
\nJudge or an Additional Sessions Judge to appeal to the\tHigh
\nCourt.\tThe Court of Judicial Commissioner, Vindhya Pradesh,
\nwas  a High Court for the purposes of the Code.\t The  appeal
\nof  the\t appellant  from jail  against\this  conviction\t and
\nsentence by the Sessions Judge therefore lay to the Court of
\nthe  Judicial Commissioner.  Under s. 418 an appeal may\t lie
\non a matter of fact as well as a matter of law, except where
\nthe  trial was by jury, in which case, the appeal would\t lie
\nonly on a matter of law, except in a case where a person had
\nbeen sentenced to death, his appeal would lie on a matter of
\nfact  as well as a matter of law although he was tried by  a
\njury.\tThe section also enables any other person  convicted
\nat the same trial with a person so sentenced to appeal on  a
\nmatter\tof  fact as well as a matter of\t law.\tSection\t 419
\nenjoins\t that  every appeal shall be made in the form  of  a
\npetition  in  writing  presented by  the  appellant  or\t his
\npleader and every such
\n512<\/span>
\npetition  shall, unless the court to which it  is  presented
\notherwise directs, be accompanied by a copy of the  judgment
\nor order appealed against and in cases tried by jury a\tcopy
\nof  the heads of the charge recorded under S. 367.   Section
\n420 enables a person who is in jail to present his  petition
\nof  appeal  and\t the copies accompanying  the  same  to\t the
\nOfficer-In-charge  of the jail who shall  thereupon  forward
\nsuch petition or copy to the proper Appellate Court.   Under
\ns. 421 on receiving the petition and copy under s. 419 or s.
\n420  the  Appellate Court shall peruse the same\t and  if  it
\nconsiders   that  there\t are  no  sufficient   grounds\t for
\ninterfering, it may dismiss the appeal summarily.  There  is
\na  proviso  to\tthis section which  states  that  no  appeal
\npresented  under  s.  419  shall  be  dismissed\t unless\t the
\nappellant or his pleader has had a reasonable opportunity of
\nbeing heard in support of the same.  The only other  section
\nfor  the purpose of this appeal, to which reference need  be
\nmade,  is  s.  430 which states that  judgments\t and  orders
\npassed\tby  an Appellate Court upon appeal shall  be  final,
\nexcept\tin  the\t cases provided for in s.  417\tand  Chapter
\nXXXII.\n<\/p>\n
It  will  be seen from these provisions of the Code  that  a
\nconvicted  person, in cases where an appeal is provided\t for
\nby  the\t Code,\tmay file a petition  of\t appeal\t in  writing
\npresented by him or his pleader and that if he is in jail he
\nmay file his petition of appeal through the jail authorities
\nwho  are  obliged to forward the petition to  the  Appellate
\nCourt concerned.  Whether an appeal is filed under s. 419 or
\nunder  s.  420\tof the Code, the Appellate  Court  has\tbeen
\nexpressly authorized, after perusing the petition of  appeal
\nand copies of the judgment or charge to the jury, if it con-
\nsiders that there is no sufficient ground for  interference,
\nto  dismiss the appeal summarily.  In the present case,\t the
\nappellant  was\tin  jail and he presented  his\tpetition  of
\nappeal\tto the Court of the Judicial Commissioner  under  s.
\n420   through  the  jail  authorities.\t It  was   summarily
\ndismissed on merits on October 28, 1955.  If that order\t was
\nlawfully made the decision of the Appellate Court was  final
\nunder  s.  430\tof  the\t Code.\t Consequently,\tthe   appeal
\npresented by
\n513<\/span>
\nthe  appellant through his pleader on October 31, 1955,\t was
\npatently not maintainable.\n<\/p>\n
We  come now to the question whether s. 421 offends  against
\nthe  provisions of Art. 14 of the Constitution which  states
\nthat  the  State  shall not deny to 1  any  person  equality
\nbefore\tthe law or the equal protection of the\tlaws  within
\nthe  territory\tof India.  This Court has  decided  in\tmany
\ncases  what  are the matters to be considered  in  order  to
\ndetermine  whether  a  particular piece\t of  legislation  is
\ndiscriminatory\tand  consequently in  contravention  of\t the
\nprovisions of Art. 14.\tIt is unnecessary to refer to  them.
\nThe object of Chapter XXXI of the Code of Criminal Procedure
\nwas  to\t make provisions for appeals against  conviction  in
\ncertain cases.\tWhere no appeal is provided by this  Chapter
\nno further question arises because no one can claim that  he
\nhas a right to appeal from any decision of a criminal court.
\nEvery  person convicted at a trial held by a Sessions  Judge
\nor an Additional Sessions Judge has been given the right  to
\nappeal\tto the High Court by virtue of the provisions of  s.
\n410  of the Code.  The right to appeal having been so  given
\nthe Code provided the manner in which such appeal should  be
\npresented  which  is to be found in ss. 419 and 420  of\t the
\nCode.  These two sections contemplate various  possibilities
\n(1) that a convicted person who is not in jail presents\t his
\npetition  of appeal in person; (2) that a  convicted  person
\nthough\tunable to present his petition of appeal  personally
\nowing  to various reasons, including his being in jail,\t can
\npresent\t it through his pleader and (3) where the  convicted
\nperson is in jail and thus unable to present his petition in
\nperson\tand  is unable to engage a pleader to  present\this,
\npetition  of  appeal,  can  present  it\t through  the\tjail
\nauthorities.  Where the convicted person presents his appeal
\nin person or through a pleader under s. 421 his appeal shall
\nnot be dismissed summarily unless he or his pleader is given
\na  reasonable opportunity of being heard in support  of\t his
\npetition.   No\tsuch consideration arises in the case  of  a
\nconvicted  person who is unable to present his\tpetition  in
\nperson or through a pleader.  There is a rational basis for
\n514<\/span>
\nmaking\tthe  classification  mentioned\tabove  which  has  a
\nreasonable  connection\twith the object of  the\t legislation
\nproviding  for\tappeals under Chapter XXXI.   Under  s.\t 410
\nthere  is  no discrimination as any person  convicted  at  a
\ntrial  held  by a Sessions Judge or an\tAdditional  Sessions
\nJudge  may  appeal to the High Court.  Where  the  convicted
\nperson\tis able to present his petition of appeal in  person
\nhis  position  is entirely different from a  person  who  is
\nunable\tto  do\tso  because he is  in  jail.   Similarly,  a
\nconvicted person whether in jail or not who can present\t his
\npetition through a pleader is in a different position from a
\nconvicted person who is in jail and is unable to present his
\npetition  through a pleader.  The Code intended in the\tcase
\nof  a convicted person who presents his petition  of  appeal
\nwhile  in  jail that his petition and the  judgment  of\t the
\ncourt  which  convicted\t him  must  be\tconsidered  by\t the
\nAppellate Court before it is summarily dismissed,  otherwise
\nthe right of appeal conferred on such a person under s.\t 410
\nwould  be  meaningless.\t  In the case of such  a  person  no
\nquestion could arise of his being heard in person because he
\nhas  not presented the appeal in person nor could  there  be
\nany  question of his pleader being heard because no  pleader
\nhad  been engaged by him to present the\t appeal.   Different
\nconsiderations\tarise in the case of a convicted person\t who
\npresents  his  petition\t of appeal in person  or  through  a
\npleader in which case he or his pleader must be heard before
\nthe  appeal is summarily dismissed.  There is, therefore,  a
\nrational  basis\t for making the\t classification\t into  three
\ncategories which has a reasonable connection with the object
\nof  the\t Code.\t It could not therefore\t be  said  that\t the
\nproviso to s’ 421 offends against the provisions of Art.  14
\nof the Constitution.\n<\/p>\n
It  was,  however, contended that although an  appeal  filed
\nunder s. 420 may have been dismissed summarily a  subsequent
\nappeal filed through a pleader ought to have been heard\t and
\nthe  Judicial Commissioner erred in holding that the  appeal
\ndid  not  lie.\t The appeal could not  have  been  summarily
\nrejected without the pleader having been
\n515<\/span>
\nheard.\tFrom that point of view the provisions of s. 421 had
\nnot been complied with.\t It is sufficient to say that if the
\norder  dated  October 28, 1955, dismissing  the\t appellant’s
\nappeal\tunder  s. 420 was lawful, a second appeal  from\t the
\nsame judgment of conviction presented through a pleader\t was
\nnot  maintainable  because the previous order  of  the\tHigh
\nCourt  dismissing the appeal was final under s. 430  of\t the
\nCode of Criminal Procedure.  Certain cases were relied\tupon
\nto   which   reference\thas  been  made\t by   the   Judicial
\nCommissioner.\tThose  cases can be distinguished  from\t the
\npresent case.  In none of them was it decided that where  an
\norder  dismissing the appeal is lawful a  subsequent  appeal
\nfiled  through a pleader was maintainable.  In our  opinion,
\nthere  is no substance in this point, once it is  held\tthat
\nthe order dated October 28, 1955, was a lawful order  which,
\nwe think, it was, as in our opinion the proviso to s. 421 in
\nno  way\t offends against the provisions of Art.\t 14  of\t the
\nConstitution.  The appeal is accordingly dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t Appeal dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
\t       —————————-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Pratap Singh vs The State Of Vindhya Pradesh (Now … on 18 November, 1960 Equivalent citations: 1961 AIR 586, 1961 SCR (2) 509 Author: S J Imam Bench: Imam, Syed Jaffer, Kapur, J.L., Gupta, K.C. Das, Dayal, Raghubar, Ayyangar, N. Rajagopala PETITIONER: PRATAP SINGH Vs. RESPONDENT: THE STATE OF VINDHYA PRADESH […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-33719","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nPratap Singh vs The State Of Vindhya Pradesh (Now ... on 18 November, 1960 - 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\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Pratap Singh vs The State Of Vindhya Pradesh (Now ... on 18 November, 1960 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960\" \/>\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=\"1960-11-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-12-10T09:58:08+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=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Pratap Singh vs The State Of Vindhya Pradesh (Now … on 18 November, 1960\",\"datePublished\":\"1960-11-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-10T09:58:08+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960\"},\"wordCount\":2053,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960\",\"name\":\"Pratap Singh vs The State Of Vindhya Pradesh (Now ... on 18 November, 1960 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1960-11-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-10T09:58:08+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Pratap Singh vs The State Of Vindhya Pradesh (Now … on 18 November, 1960\"}]},{\"@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":"Pratap Singh vs The State Of Vindhya Pradesh (Now ... on 18 November, 1960 - 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\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Pratap Singh vs The State Of Vindhya Pradesh (Now ... on 18 November, 1960 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1960-11-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-12-10T09:58:08+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":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Pratap Singh vs The State Of Vindhya Pradesh (Now … on 18 November, 1960","datePublished":"1960-11-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-10T09:58:08+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960"},"wordCount":2053,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960","name":"Pratap Singh vs The State Of Vindhya Pradesh (Now ... on 18 November, 1960 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1960-11-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-10T09:58:08+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/pratap-singh-vs-the-state-of-vindhya-pradesh-now-on-18-november-1960#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Pratap Singh vs The State Of Vindhya Pradesh (Now … on 18 November, 1960"}]},{"@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\/33719","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=33719"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33719\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=33719"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=33719"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=33719"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}