{"id":49353,"date":"1992-05-15T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1992-05-14T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992"},"modified":"2015-08-07T05:57:10","modified_gmt":"2015-08-07T00:27:10","slug":"r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992","title":{"rendered":"R.S. Sodhi,Advocate vs State Of U.P on 15 May, 1992"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">R.S. Sodhi,Advocate vs State Of U.P on 15 May, 1992<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1994 AIR   38, \t\t  1994 SCC  Supl.  (1) 143<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Ahmadi<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Ahmadi, A.M. (J)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nR.S. SODHI,ADVOCATE\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF U.P.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT15\/05\/1992\n\nBENCH:\nAHMADI, A.M. (J)\nBENCH:\nAHMADI, A.M. (J)\nKULDIP SINGH (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1994 AIR   38\t\t  1994 SCC  Supl.  (1) 143\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>ORDER\n<\/p>\n<p>1.This\twrit  petition brought under Article  32  of  the<br \/>\nConstitution concerns the incident which had taken place  at<br \/>\nPilibhit  on September 12\/13, 1991 in which 10 persons\twere<br \/>\nreported  to  have  been killed in what\t were  described  as<br \/>\n,encounters&#8217;  between  the Punjab Militants  and  the  local<br \/>\npolice.\t  The news item in connection therewith appeared  in<br \/>\nThe  Times of India on the basis whereof this  petition\t was<br \/>\nfiled.\tThe issue was raised in the Parliament and teams  of<br \/>\nMPs  belonging to the Congress(1) and BJP also\tvisited\t the<br \/>\nplaces of occurrence to make an on-the-spot inquiry.   Their<br \/>\nreports\t are on record.\t We have also perused the report  of<br \/>\nthe  ACJM,  Pilibhit  in which it is pointed  out  that\t the<br \/>\nidentity  of  the persons killed in the encounters  was\t not<br \/>\ncorrectly  stated.   The  investigation\t in  regard  to\t the<br \/>\nincident  was  handed over to an officer  of  the  Inspector<br \/>\nGeneral&#8217;s  level  and  we are told  that  the  local  police<br \/>\nofficers  suspected to be concerned with the incidents\twere<br \/>\nalso  transferred  to  enable the officer to  carry  on\t the<br \/>\ninquiry unhindered.  Subsequently, the State Government also<br \/>\nappointed a one member commission headed by a sitting  judge<br \/>\nof  the Allahabad High Court to inquire into the matter\t but<br \/>\nit  appears  that in some writ petition filed  in  the\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt  of Allahabad (Lucknow Bench) a stay has been  granted<br \/>\nrestraining the commission from functioning.  Be that as  it<br \/>\nmay, the fact remains that three incidents in which as\tmany<br \/>\nas 10 lives (now stated to be eleven) were lost had<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">144<\/span><br \/>\nadmittedly  taken  place  and the need\tfor  an\t independent<br \/>\ninvestigation  can  hardly  be disputed.   Since  the  local<br \/>\npolice\twas involved in the said encounters, a\trequest\t has<br \/>\nbeen  made  that  an  independent agency  may  be  asked  to<br \/>\ninquire\/investigate  into the matter in accordance with\t the<br \/>\nCode  of  Criminal  Procedure with a view  to  bringing\t the<br \/>\noffenders,  if\tany, to book.  Mr Sodhi\t contends  that\t the<br \/>\ninvestigation  may  be\tdirected to be carried\tout  by\t the<br \/>\nCentral\t Bureau of Investigation having regard to  the\tfact<br \/>\nthat  the accusations are leveled against the local  police.<br \/>\nHe  points out that even the State Government has  seen\t the<br \/>\nneed  for inquiry by an independent commission.\t As  against<br \/>\nthis  the learned counsel for the  respondent-State  submits<br \/>\nthat  the  State Government has taken prompt action  in\t the<br \/>\nmatter\tby appointing a high level officer to  inquire\tinto<br \/>\nthe  incidents\tand by promptly transferring  the  concerned<br \/>\nlocal  police  so that there may be no\tpossibility  of\t any<br \/>\ntampering  or interference by them.  He further\t points\t out<br \/>\nthat  the State Government has also taken the next  step  of<br \/>\nappointing a commission headed by a sitting High Court Judge<br \/>\nto probe the incidents and to arrive at the truth and  hence<br \/>\nthere  is  no  need  for directing  the\t Central  Bureau  of<br \/>\nInvestigation to investigate into the matter.  In support of<br \/>\nthis contention he invited our attention to the observations<br \/>\nmade by this Court in <a href=\"\/doc\/1119049\/\">Chaitanya Kalbagh v. State of U.P.1 In<\/a><br \/>\nthat  case  this  Court\t observed  that\t in  the  facts\t and<br \/>\ncircumstances  presented before it there was  an  imperative<br \/>\nneed  of ensuring that the guardians of law and order do  in<br \/>\nfact  observe  the code of discipline expected of  them\t and<br \/>\nthat  they function strictly as the protectors\tof  innocent<br \/>\ncitizens.  This Court refrained from saying anything further<br \/>\nin  the matter so that no prejudice is caused to  anyone  in<br \/>\nthe   course  of  the  inquiry\/investigation  that  may\t  be<br \/>\nundertaken.    Counsel\temphasised  that  once\t the   State<br \/>\nGovernment has shown its bona fides by taking prompt  action<br \/>\nin  the\t matter it must be left to the State  Government  to<br \/>\ncomplete  its function under the Code of Criminal  Procedure<br \/>\nwithout any interference from outside agency.  Emphasis\t was<br \/>\nlaid  on  the observation that matters which  properly\tfall<br \/>\nwithin the domain of the State Government should be left  to<br \/>\nthat  Government  and that Government should  be  petitioned<br \/>\nfirst before any interference by the court is called for.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.We have examined the facts and circumstances leading to<br \/>\nthe  filing of the petition and the events that\t have  taken<br \/>\nplace  after the so-called encounters.\tWhether the loss  of<br \/>\nlives  was on account of a genuine or a fake encounter is  a<br \/>\nmatter\twhich  has  to be  inquired  into  and\tinvestigated<br \/>\nclosely.   We, however, refrain from making any\t observation<br \/>\nin that behalf; we should, therefore, not be understood even<br \/>\nremotely  to be expressing any view thereon one way  or\t the<br \/>\nother.\t We  have perused the events that have\ttaken  place<br \/>\nsince the incidents but we are refraining from entering upon<br \/>\nthe  details thereof lest it may prejudice any party but  we<br \/>\nthink  that since the accusations are directed\tagainst\t the<br \/>\nlocal police personnel it would be desirable to entrust\t the<br \/>\ninvestigation  to  an independent agency  like\tthe  Central<br \/>\nBureau of Investigation so that all concerned including\t the<br \/>\nrelatives   of\tthe  deceased  may  feel  assured  that\t  an<br \/>\nindependent  agency  is looking into the  matter  and.\tthat<br \/>\nwould\tlend   the  final  outcome  of\t the   investigation<br \/>\ncredibility.  However faithfully the local police may  carry<br \/>\nout the investigation, the same will lack credibility  since<br \/>\nthe  allegations are against them.  It is only with that  in<br \/>\nmind that we having thought it both<br \/>\n1 (1989) 2 SCC 314: 1989 SCC (Cri)  363<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">145<\/span><br \/>\nadvisable  and\tdesirable  as well as  in  the\tinterest  of<br \/>\njustice\t to entrust the investigation to the Central  Bureau<br \/>\nof  Investigation  forthwith and we do hope  that  it  would<br \/>\ncomplete  the investigation at an early date so\t that  those<br \/>\ninvolved  in the occurrences, one way or the other,  may  be<br \/>\nbrought to book.  We direct accordingly.  In so ordering  we<br \/>\nmean  no reflection on the credibility of either  the  local<br \/>\npolice\tor the State Government but we have been  guided  by<br \/>\nthe  larger requirements of justice.  The writ petition\t and<br \/>\nthe review petition stand disposed of by this order.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">146<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India R.S. Sodhi,Advocate vs State Of U.P on 15 May, 1992 Equivalent citations: 1994 AIR 38, 1994 SCC Supl. (1) 143 Author: Ahmadi Bench: Ahmadi, A.M. (J) PETITIONER: R.S. SODHI,ADVOCATE Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF U.P. DATE OF JUDGMENT15\/05\/1992 BENCH: AHMADI, A.M. (J) BENCH: AHMADI, A.M. (J) KULDIP SINGH (J) CITATION: 1994 AIR [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-49353","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>R.S. Sodhi,Advocate vs State Of U.P on 15 May, 1992 - 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\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"R.S. Sodhi,Advocate vs State Of U.P on 15 May, 1992 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992\" \/>\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=\"1992-05-14T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-08-07T00:27:10+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=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"R.S. Sodhi,Advocate vs State Of U.P on 15 May, 1992\",\"datePublished\":\"1992-05-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-07T00:27:10+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992\"},\"wordCount\":1006,\"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\\\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992\",\"name\":\"R.S. Sodhi,Advocate vs State Of U.P on 15 May, 1992 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1992-05-14T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-08-07T00:27:10+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"R.S. Sodhi,Advocate vs State Of U.P on 15 May, 1992\"}]},{\"@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":"R.S. Sodhi,Advocate vs State Of U.P on 15 May, 1992 - 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\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"R.S. Sodhi,Advocate vs State Of U.P on 15 May, 1992 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1992-05-14T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-08-07T00:27:10+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":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"R.S. Sodhi,Advocate vs State Of U.P on 15 May, 1992","datePublished":"1992-05-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-07T00:27:10+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992"},"wordCount":1006,"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\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992","name":"R.S. Sodhi,Advocate vs State Of U.P on 15 May, 1992 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1992-05-14T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-08-07T00:27:10+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/r-s-sodhiadvocate-vs-state-of-u-p-on-15-may-1992#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"R.S. Sodhi,Advocate vs State Of U.P on 15 May, 1992"}]},{"@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\/49353","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=49353"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49353\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=49353"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=49353"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=49353"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}