{"id":34687,"date":"1991-01-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1991-01-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991"},"modified":"2016-06-04T01:59:59","modified_gmt":"2016-06-03T20:29:59","slug":"babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991","title":{"rendered":"Babu Lal vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 January, 1991"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Babu Lal vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 January, 1991<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1991 AIR 1310, \t\t 1991 SCR (1)\t 73<\/div>\n
Author: B Ray<\/div>\n
Bench: Ray, B.C. (J)<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nBABU LAL\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT16\/01\/1991\n\nBENCH:\nRAY, B.C. (J)\nBENCH:\nRAY, B.C. (J)\nVERMA, JAGDISH SARAN (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1991 AIR 1310\t\t  1991 SCR  (1)\t 73\n 1991 SCC  (2) 335\t  JT 1991 (1)\t211\n 1991 SCALE  (1)39\n\n\nACT:\n     Food  Supplies Department--Sub-Inspector--Appointed  on\nad-hoc\t temporary  basis--Service  terminated\tbecause\t  of\npendency  of  criminal\tproceedings--Later  acquitted--Order\nterminating\tservices    held    illegal--Entitled\t  to\nregularisation of service.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n     The  appellant was appointed an Sub-Inspector,  food  &\nSupplies  by respondent No. 2 on 13.4.1975 on  ad-hoc  basis\nagainst\t service-man quota; the post being purely  temporary\nliable to be terminated without notice and without assigning\nany  reasons  or  on arrival of a  regular  candidate.\t The\nappellant  continued in service on that post  till  November\n17,  1980, when his services were terminated.  Prior to\t the\ntermination  of his services he was placed under  suspension\non April 15, 1980 in view of the criminal proceedings  under\nSection\t 420,  IPC  pending  against  him  and\tbefore\t the\nculmination  of\t criminal  proceedings,\t his  services\twere\nterminated by order dated November 17, 1980, as\t  aforesaid.\nCriminal  case against the appellant was decided on  October\n21,  1981  wherein  he was acquitted  of  the  charge.\t The\nappellant  on  receiving  the order of\ttermination  of\t his\nservices filed Civil Suit 453 of 1981 in the court of Senior\nSub-Judge, narnaul praying for a declaration that the orders\nof  suspension\tas  also termination  were  illegal,  wrong,\narbitrary  and without jurisdiction and that  the  appellant\nwas  entitled  to reinstatement and  regularisation  of\t his\nservice\t under\tthe Government notification  dated  1.1.1980\nissued\tby the Chief Secretary to the Government of  Haryana\nauthorising regularisation of such ad-hoc employees who held\nthe  Class  III\t posts for a minimum period  of\t two  years.\nAccording to the appellant his case was covered by the\tsaid\nnotification and as such he was entitled to all the benefits\nof service.  The Senior Sub Judge held that as the appellant\nwas  acquitted of the offence, the authorities\tshould\thave\nrevoked\t the suspension order and have paid the pay for\t the\nperiod for which the appellant remained under suspension and\nthus  allowed to the appellant all the benefits.  An  appeal\nwas  taken by the respondents to the Addl.   District  Judge\nwho  affirmed the order of the trial court holding  that  no\nenquiry\t was conducted before termination of the service  of\nthe  appellant.\t  Against the order of\tthe  Addl.  District\nJudge, the respondents preferred an appeal\n\t\t\t\t\t\t       74\nbefore the High Court and the High Court allowed the  appeal\nholding\t  that\tthe  appellant\twas  not  entitled   to\t  be\nregularised  automatically  unless  he\tfulfilled  all\t the\nconditions given in the notification.  It was also held that\nthe case of the appellant was considered for  regularisation\nby the Department but the same was not found  suitable;\t the\nservices of the appellant were terminated in accordance with\nthe terms of his appointment.  The appellant has filed\tthis\nappeal\tagainst\t that order in this  court  after  obtaining\nspecial leave.\n     Allowing the appeal, this Court,\n     HELD:  The order of suspension made by  the  respondent\nNo.  2\tis  admittedly\ton the\tsole  ground  that  criminal\nproceeding was pending against the appellant.  The order  of\ntermination  had been made illegally during the pendency  of\nthe order of suspension and also during the pendency of\t the\ncriminal   proceeding  which  ultimately  ended\t  with\t the\nacquittal  of the appellant.  The settle position in law  is\nthat  the  appellant  who was suspended\t on  the  ground  of\npendency  of  criminal\tproceeding  against  him,  on  being\nacquitted   of\tthe  criminal  charge  is  entitled  to\t  be\nreinstated  in\tservice.  His acquittal\t from  the  criminal\ncharge\tdoes  not  debar  the  disciplinary  authorities  to\ninitiate  disciplinary\tproceedings  and  after\t giving\t  an\nopportunity  of\t hearing to the appellant pass an  order  of\ntermination on the basis of the terms and conditions of\t the\norder of his appointment. [78C-E]\n     As the appellant whose name was sent through Employment\nExchange  and who was appointed and has completed two  years\nservice\t on 31.12.1979, he is entitled to be considered\t for\nregularisation\tin  the\t post  of  Sub-Inspector,  Food\t and\nSupplies. [78E]\n     Smt. Rajinder Kaur v. State of Punjab and Anr.,<\/a>  [1986]\n4 S.C.C. 141; Anoop Jaiswal v. Government of India,<\/a> [1984] 2\nS.C.R.\t 453;  Hardeep\tSingh  v.  State  of   Haryana\t and\nOrs.,<\/a>[1987] 4 S.L.R. 576, referred to.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
     CIVIL  APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Civil  Appeal  No.
\n1309 of 1986.\n<\/p>\n
     From  the\tJudgment  and Order dated  8.8.1985  of\t the
\nPunjab\tand Haryana High Court in Regular Second Appeal\t No.
\n307 of 1985.\n<\/p>\n
     A.B. Rohtagi, Ranbir Singh Yadav and H.M. Singh for the
\nAppellant.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t75<\/span><\/p>\n
     A.G. Prasad and Mahabir Singh for the Respondents.
\n     The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
\n     RAY,  J.  This appeal on special leave is\tagainst\t the
\njudgment  and  order passed by the High Court  of  Punjab  &
\nHaryana in Regular Second Appeal No. 307 of 1985 whereby the
\nHigh  Court upheld the order of termination of\tservices  of
\nservices  of the appellant made on November 17, 1980  passed
\nby  the respondent No. 2, the Directer of Food and  Supplies
\nand Deputy Secretary to Government of Haryana, Chandigarh.\n<\/p>\n
     The salient facts that gave rise to the instant  appeal
\nare as follows:\n<\/p>\n
     The  appellant we appointed as Sub-Inspector, Food\t and
\nSupplies  in  the  Department of Food and  Supplies  by\t the
\nRespondent No.2\t by order dated April 13, 1975\ton  and\t hoc
\nbasis  against the ex-servicemen quota.\t As per the  service
\nrules  the terms and conditions of the said appointment\t are
\nas hereunder:\n<\/p>\n
\t “(i)\tThe   post  is\t purely\t  temporary.\tYour
\n\t appointment is purely on ad hoc basis and shall not
\n\t exceed six months.  Your services are liable to  be
\n\t terminated  at any time during this period  without
\n\t any notice and without assigning any reason.\tYour
\n\t services  are also liable to be terminated  at\t any
\n\t time\twithout\t  notice  on  arrival\tof   regular
\n\t candidates  from the Haryana  Subordinate  Services
\n\t Selection Board.”\n<\/p>\n
     The  appellant had been continuing in the said post  of
\nSub-Inspector without any break till November 17, 1980\ti.e.
\nthe  date  of termination of his services.   The  appellant,
\nhowever, was served with an order of suspension made by\t the
\nRespondent  No. 2 on April 15, 1980 in view of the  criminal
\nproceedings  pending  against the appellant u\/s 420  of\t the
\nIndian Penal Code during the pendency of which the order  of
\ntermination  was  made\ton  November  17,  1980.   The\tsaid
\ncriminal proceeding being Criminal Case No. 1413 of 1981 was
\ndecided on October 21, 1981 wherein he has been acquitted of
\nthe said charge.  The Additional Chief Judicial\t Magistrate,
\nNarnual had found that:-\n<\/p>\n
\t “….. Babu Ram accused was not present at the spot
\n\t and  he had no role to play in the distribution  of
\n\t the cement.  The Appellant could not point out even
\n\t a  single  factor  from  the  file  by\t which\t the
\n\t participation of this accused can be said to
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t       76<\/span>
\n\t have  been  proved by the  prosecution.   As  such,
\n\t accused,  Babu\t Ram cannot be held  guilty  of\t the
\n\t offence charged and he is acquitted of the same.”
\n The plaintiff-appellant immediately on receiving the  order
\nof termination after giving the requisite notice brought  an
\naction\tbeing  Civil  Suit No.453 of 1981 in  the  court  of
\nSenior\tSub Judge, Narnual praying for a declaration to\t the
\neffect that the order of suspension dated 15.4.1980 and\t the
\norder\tof  termination\t dated\t17.11.1980  passed  by\t the
\nrespondent  No.2 were illegal, wrong, arbitrary and  without
\njurisdiction and the appellant is entitled to  reinstatement
\nwith  effect from the date of his suspension and so  further
\nentitled  to be regularised and to all the benefits  of\t the
\nservice.   It  had  been  stated in  the  pleadings  of\t the
\nappellant that a notification dated 1st January, 1980 issued
\nby  the\t Chief\tSecretary  to  the  Government\tof   Haryana
\naddressed  to all the Head of the Departments vide memo\t No.
\nG.S.R.\/Const.\/\t Art.  309\/80  stating\tthat  such  ad\t hoc
\nemployees who hold the class III posts for a minimum  period
\nof  two\t years on 31.12.1979 are to be regularised  if\tthey
\nfulfill the following conditions:\n<\/p>\n
\t (a) Only such ad hoc employees as have completed  a
\n\t minimum  of two years service on 31.12.1979  should
\n\t be   made  regular.   However,\t break\tin   service
\n\t rendered on ad hoc basis upto a period of one month
\n\t may  be  condoned but break  accruing\tbecause\t the
\n\t concerned  employee  had left service\tof  his\t own
\n\t volition  or  where  the  ad  hoc  appointment\t was
\n\t against   a  post\/vacancy  for\t which\tno   regular
\n\t recruitment was required\/intended to be made,\ti.e.
\n\t leave\tarrangements or filling up of  other  short-
\n\t time vacancies, may not be condoned.\n<\/p>\n
\t  (b)  Only  such  ad hoc  employees  as  have\tbeen
\n\t recruited through the Employment Exchange should be
\n\t made regular.\n<\/p>\n
\t (c)   The work and conduct of the ad hoc  employees
\n\t proposed to be regularised should be of an  overall
\n\t good category.\n<\/p>\n
The  plaintiff-appellant pleaded that he having put  in\t the
\nminimum\t period of two years of service on 31.12.1979 became
\nentitled to have his service regularised in view of the said
\nNotification.  He further pleaded that the alleged order  of
\ntermination  was  in fact an order of dismissal\t and  so  it
\namounts to punishment and the same being penal in nature  is
\nnull  and  void\t because it contravened\t the  provisions  of
\nConstitution of India.\tThe Senior Sub Judge, Narnaul  after
\nhearing the
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t       77<\/span>
\nparties held that as the petitioner-appellant was  acquitted
\nof the said offence, the authorities should have revoked the
\nsuspension  order and have paid the pay for the\t period\t for
\nwhich  the appellant remained under suspension.\t  The  Court
\nfurther held that the appellant will be entitled to all\t the
\nbenefits of his service.\n<\/p>\n
     Against this judgement and decree, an appeal was  filed
\nbeing  C.A. No. 129 of 1983 in the Court of  Addl.  District
\nJudge,\tNarnaul by the State.  The Addl. District  Judge  by
\nhis  judgement dated 18.10.1984 affirmed the  judgement\t and
\ndecree of the learned Sub-Judge holding that no enquiry\t was
\nconducted   before  termination\t of  the  service   of\t the
\nappellant.  The Addl. District Judge also held that:
\n\t “……the  plaintiff\thad completed two  years  of
\n\t service and according to executive instructions his
\n\t services were bound to be regularised.\t  Reasonable
\n\t opportunity   to  defend  was\tnot  given  to\t the
\n\t plaintiff  before  termination\t of  his   services.
\n\t Order\tof  termination\t of services  was  merely  a
\n\t camouflage   for   an\torder\tof   dismissal\t for
\n\t misconduct.  He was still under suspension when  he
\n\t was  terminated.  All these facts lead only to\t one
\n\t conclusion  that the impugned order of\t termination
\n\t of  the  services of the plaintiff is\tbad  in\t law
\n\t ….”\n<\/p>\n
     Against this judgement and order R.S.A. No. 307 of 1985
\nwas  filed  by\tthe said respondents in the  High  Court  of
\nPunjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.  The High Curt allowed the
\nappeal\ton  setting aside the judgement and  decree  of\t the
\ncourts below holding that the appellant was not entitled  to
\nbe  regularised\t automatically unless he fulfilled  all\t the
\nconditions  given in the Notification.\tIt was further\theld
\nthat   when   the  case\t of  the  appellant  came   up\t for
\nregularisation\tthe  Department found that  the\t appellant’s
\nwork  and conduct was not of the required standard so as  to
\njustify\t his  regularisation and consequently  his  services
\nwere  not regularised.\tIt was further held that  since\t the
\nappellant  was\tad hoc employee\t therefore,  the  Department
\ninstead\t  of  waiting  for  the\t result\t of   the   criminal
\nproceedings  thought  it  fit  under  the  circumstances  to
\ndispense  with the services of the appellant  in  accordance
\nwith the terms of his appointment.\n<\/p>\n
     This judgement is under challenge in this appeal.\t The
\npivotal question that poses itself for consideration  before
\nthis   Court  is  firstly  whether  during  the\t period\t  of
\nsuspension   in\t view  of  the\tcriminal  proceeding   which
\nultimately ended with the acquittal, an order of termi-\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t       78<\/span><\/p>\n
nation\tcan be made against the appellant by the  respondent
\nNo.2 terminating his ad hoc services without reinstating him
\nas  he\twas  acquitted from the charge u\/s 420\t I.P.C.\t and
\nsecondly whether the impugned order of termination from\t his
\nservice can be made straight away without reinstating him in
\nthe  service after he earned acquittal in the criminal\tcase
\nand   thereafter  without  initiating  any  proceeding\t for
\ntermination  of\t his  service  as  the\timpugned  order\t  of
\ntermination  was of penal nature having civil  consequences.
\nIt  has also to be  considered in this connection  that\t the
\nrespondent  No.2  has also not considered the  case  of\t the
\nappellant for regularisation of his services even though  he
\nhad  completed\ttwo  years  of\tservice\t as  on\t  31.12.1979
\nfulfilling all the requisite terms and conditions  mentioned
\nin  the said Notification.  The order of suspension made  by
\nthe  respondent No.2 is admittedly on the  sole\t ground that
\ncriminal proceeding was pending against the appellant.\t The
\norder  of  termination had been made  illegally\t during\t the
\npendency  of  the order of suspension and  also\t during\t the
\npendency  of the criminal proceeding which ultimately  ended
\nwith  the  acquittal of the appellant.\tIt  is\tthe  settled
\nposition  in law that the appellant who was suspended on the
\nground\tof pendency of criminal proceeding against  him,  on
\nbeing acquitted of the criminal\t charge is  entitled  to  be
\nreinstated  in\tservice.  His acquittal\t from  the  criminal
\ncharge\tdoes  not  debar  the  disciplinary  authorities  to
\ninitiate  disciplinary\tproceedings  and  after\t giving\t  an
\nopportunity  of\t hearing to the appellant pass an  order  of
\ntermination on the basis of the terms and conditions of\t the
\norder  of  his appointment.  Furthermore  as  the  appellant
\nwhose name was sent through Employment Exchange and who\t was
\nappointed and has completed two years service on  31.12.1979
\nis entitled to be considered for regularisation in the\tpost
\nSub-Inspector,\tFood  and  Supplies.   The  High  Court\t had
\nobserved that:\n<\/p>\n
\t “…..\t In these circumstances, when his case\tcame
\n\t up  for regularisation, the Department\t found\tthat
\n\t the  plaintiff’s  work and conduct was not  of\t the
\n\t required   standard   so   as\t to   justify\t his
\n\t regularisation\t and consequently his services\twere
\n\t not regularised.”\n<\/p>\n
This  finding  of the High Court is totally baseless  in  as
\nmuch  as  the  counsel for the\tsaid  respondent  could\t not
\nproduce\t any order or documentary evidence to show that\t the
\nrespondents  considered\t the case of the appellant  for\t the
\npurpose\t  of   regularisation\tin   accordance\t  with\t the
\nNotification  dated 1st January, 1980.\tAs such the  finding
\nof  the\t High Court is wholly bad and  illegal.\t  The  other
\nfinding\t of  the  High\tCourt  that  the  acquittal  of\t the
\nappellant by the criminal court was of no consequence as his
\nservices  were terminated before the order of acquittal\t was
\nmade because the appellant was no more in service is also
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t       79<\/span>
\nagainst the well settled legal position.  It has also to  be
\nborne in mind that under the Notification dated 1st January,
\n1980   issued  by  the\tGovernment,  the  appellant   having
\nfulfilled the condition of two years of service is  entitled
\nto be considered by the Government for regularisation of his
\nservice\t in accordance with the said executive\tinstructions
\nissued\tby  the Government.  As we have said  herein  before
\nthat there is nothing on record to show that the  Government
\nhas   ever  considered\tthe  case  of  the   appellant\t for
\nregularisation\t of  his  service  in  the  light   of\t the
\ninstructions  contained in the said Notification  dated\t 1st
\nJanuary, 1980, the impugned order of termination of  service
\nmade by the Government is illegal and arbitrary and so it is
\nliable to be quashed and set aside.\n<\/p>\n
     Moreover,\tfrom the sequences of facts of his case\t the
\ninference  is  irresistible  that  the\timpugned  order\t  of
\ntermination  of\t the service of the appellant  is  of  penal
\nnature\thaving\tcivil consequence.  It is  well\t settled  by
\nseveral\t decisions  of this Court that though the  order  is
\ninnocuous on the face of it still then the Court that though
\nthe  order  is innocuous on the face of it  still  then\t the
\nCourt  if necessary, for the ends of fair play\tand  justice
\ncan lift the veil and find out the real nature of the  order
\nand  if\t it  is found that the impugned order  is  penal  in
\nnature\teven  though  it  is  couched  with  the  order\t  of
\ntermination  in accordance with the terms and conditions  of
\nthe  order  of\tappointment, the order will  be\t set  aside.
\nReference may be made in this connection to the decision  of
\nthis  Court  in Smt. Rajinder Kaur v. State  of\t Punjab\t and
\nAnother, [1989] 4 SCC 181 in which one of us is a party.  It
\nhas been held that:\n<\/p>\n
\t “The  impugned order of discharge though stated  to
\n\t be  made in accordance with the provisions of\tRule
\n\t 12.21 of the Punjab Police Rules, 1934, was  really
\n\t made  on  the basis of the misconduct as  found  on
\n\t enquiry  into\t the  allegation  behind  her  back.
\n\t Though\t couched in innocuous terms, the  order\t was
\n\t merely a camouflage for an order of dismissal\tfrom
\n\t service  on the ground of misconduct.\t This  order
\n\t had  been  made without serving the  appellant\t any
\n\t charge-sheet,\twithout asking for  any\t explanation
\n\t from her and without giving any opportunity to show
\n\t cause against the purported order f dismissal\tfrom
\n\t service and without giving any opportunity to\tshow
\n\t cause against the purported order of dismissal from
\n\t service  and  without\tgiving\tany  opportunity  to
\n\t cross-examine the witness examined.  The order\t was
\n\t thus, made in total contravention of the provisions
\n\t of  Article 311(2) and was therefore, liable to  be
\n\t quashed and set aside.”\n<\/p>\n
     This case relied on the observations made by this Court
\nin the case of Anoop Jaiswal v. Government of India,<\/a>  [1984]
\n2 S.C.R. 453
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t       80<\/span>
\nwherein it has been observed that:\n<\/p>\n
\t “….Where the form of order is merely a camouflage
\n\t for  an  order of dismissal for  misconduct  it  is
\n\t always open to the court before which the order  is
\n\t challenged to go behind the form and ascertain\t the
\n\t true  character of the order.\tIf the\tcourt  holds
\n\t that  the  order  though in the form  is  merely  a
\n\t determination\tof employment is in reality a  cloak
\n\t for an order of punishment, the court would not  be
\n\t debarred, merely because of the form of the  order,
\n\t in  giving  effect to the rights conferred  by\t law
\n\t upon the employee”.\n<\/p>\n
     Similar observation has been made by this Court in\t the
\ncase of Hardeep Singh v. State of Haryana and Ors.,<\/a> [1987] 4
\nS.L.R. 576. It has been held in this case as under:
\n\t “In the instant case, it is clear and evident\tfrom
\n\t the averments made in paragraph 3, sub-para (i)  to\n<\/p>\n
\t (iii)\tand paragraph (v) of  the  counter-affidavit
\n\t that  the impugned order of removal\/dismissal\tfrom
\n\t service was in substance and in effect an order made
\n\t by way of punishment after considering the  service
\n\t conduct  of  petitioner.   There is  no  doubt\t the
\n\t impugned order casts a stigma on the service career
\n\t of  the petitioner and the order being made by\t way
\n\t of  punishment, the petitioner is entitled  to\t the
\n\t protection  afforded by the provisions\t of  Article
\n\t 311(2)\t of  the  Constitution as  well\t as  by\t the
\n\t provisions  of\t  Rule 16.24 (Ix)(b) of\t the  Punjab
\n\t Police Rules, 1984….”\n<\/p>\n
\t In  the premises aforesaid, we are  constrained  to
\nhold that the judgement rendered by the High Court is wholly
\nillegal\t and unwarranted and as such we quash and set  aside
\nthe  same and affirm the judgement of the courts below.\t  We
\ndirect\tthat  the  appellant be reinstated  in\tthe  service
\nimmediately  and  be paid all his emoluments  i.e.  pay\t and
\nallowances from the date of the order of his suspension i.e.
\n15.4.1980 till the date of reinstatement into service  minus
\nthe  suspension\t allowance  that had been  received  by\t the
\nappellant during the period of his suspension (if any).\t The
\nrespondents  are  at  liberty to consider the  case  of\t the
\nappellant for regularisation in the light of the norms\tlaid
\ndown   in   the\t executive  instructions   issued   on\t 1st
\nJanuary,1980 by Notification No. G.S.R.\/Const.\/Art.  309\/80.
\nThe  appeal is allowed.\t There will be no order as to  costs
\nin the facts the circumstances of the case.\n<\/p>\n
Y.Lal\t\t\t\t\tAppeal allowed.\n\t\t\t\t\t\t       81<\/span>\n\n\n\n<\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Babu Lal vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 January, 1991 Equivalent citations: 1991 AIR 1310, 1991 SCR (1) 73 Author: B Ray Bench: Ray, B.C. (J) PETITIONER: BABU LAL Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT16\/01\/1991 BENCH: RAY, B.C. (J) BENCH: RAY, B.C. (J) VERMA, JAGDISH […]<\/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-34687","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nBabu Lal vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 January, 1991 - 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\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Babu Lal vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 January, 1991 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991\" \/>\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=\"1991-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-06-03T20:29:59+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=\"16 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Babu Lal vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 January, 1991\",\"datePublished\":\"1991-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-03T20:29:59+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991\"},\"wordCount\":2566,\"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\\\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991\",\"name\":\"Babu Lal vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 January, 1991 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1991-01-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-06-03T20:29:59+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Babu Lal vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 January, 1991\"}]},{\"@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":"Babu Lal vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 January, 1991 - 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\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Babu Lal vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 January, 1991 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1991-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-06-03T20:29:59+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":"16 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Babu Lal vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 January, 1991","datePublished":"1991-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-03T20:29:59+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991"},"wordCount":2566,"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\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991","name":"Babu Lal vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 January, 1991 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1991-01-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-06-03T20:29:59+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/babu-lal-vs-state-of-haryana-and-ors-on-16-january-1991#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Babu Lal vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 January, 1991"}]},{"@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\/34687","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=34687"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/34687\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=34687"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=34687"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=34687"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}