{"id":57566,"date":"2009-03-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-03-24T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009"},"modified":"2018-03-09T04:05:05","modified_gmt":"2018-03-08T22:35:05","slug":"hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009","title":{"rendered":"Hari Mohan Mittal vs State Of Haryana on 25 March, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Hari Mohan Mittal vs State Of Haryana on 25 March, 2009<\/div>\n
Crl. Misc. No. M- 16124 of 2008                         -1-\n\n\n      In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh\n\n\n                                 Crl. Misc. No. M- 16124 of 2008\n                                 Date of Decision:March 25, 2009\n\n\nHari Mohan Mittal\n\n\n                                            ---Petitioner\n\n\n                   versus\n\n\nState of Haryana\n\n                                            ---Respondent\n\nCoram:       HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA\n\n                ***\n\nPresent:     Mr. Akshay Bhan,Advocate,\n             for the petitioner\n\n             Mr. Sidharth Sarup, AAG, Haryana\n\n                   ***\n\n\nSABINA, J.\n<\/pre>\n
             Hari Mohan Mittal-petitioner has filed this petition under<\/p>\n
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure(hereinafter referred to as<\/p>\n
“Cr.P.C.”) for quashing of FIR No. 2 dated 18.3.2005 under Sections 7, 13<\/p>\n
(1)D and 14 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (for short- “the Act”)<\/p>\n
registered at Police Station SVB, District Rohtak and all consequential<\/p>\n
proceedings arising therefrom.\n<\/p>\n
             FIR in question was lodged on the basis of letter dated<\/p>\n
17.5.2004 by Chief Secretary,        Haryana Government, Department of<\/p>\n
Vigilance after enquiring into the complaint made by Jai Bhagwan before it.
\n Crl. Misc. No. M- 16124 of 2008                          -2-<\/span><\/p>\n
            Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on the<\/p>\n
same allegation, petitioner was proceeded departmentally and it was found<\/p>\n
vide report dated 30.1.2007 ( Annexure P-2) that complainant Jai Bhagwan<\/p>\n
is habitual of committing theft of electricity. Vide report dated 30.1.2007<\/p>\n
(Annexure P-2)     it was held that the allegations leveled against the<\/p>\n
petitioner were not proved. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed<\/p>\n
reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in P.S.Rajya vs. State of Bihar<\/p>\n
(1996) 9 SCC 1. Para 17 of the said judgment is reproduced as under:-<\/p>\n
            “At the outset we may point out that the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
            respondent could not but accept the position that the standard<\/p>\n
            of proof required to establish the guilt in a criminal case is far<\/p>\n
            higher than the standard of proof required to establish the guilt<\/p>\n
            in the departmental proceedings. He also accepted that in the<\/p>\n
            present case, the charge in the departmental proceedings and in<\/p>\n
            the criminal proceedings is one and the same. He did not<\/p>\n
            dispute the findings rendered in the departmental proceedings<\/p>\n
            and the ultimate result of it. On these premises, if we proceed<\/p>\n
            further then there is no difficulty in accepting the case of the<\/p>\n
            appellant. For if the charge which is identical could not be<\/p>\n
            established in a departmental proceedings and in view of the<\/p>\n
            admitted discrepancies in the reports submitted by the valuers<\/p>\n
            one wonders what is there further to proceed against the<\/p>\n
            appellant in criminal proceedings.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            Learned State counsel on the other hand has submitted that the<\/p>\n
offence committed by the petitioner is serious in nature. He has accepted<\/p>\n
Rs. 5000\/- as bribe from Jai Bhagwan. Complainant was not examined. Sh.
\n Crl. Misc. No. M- 16124 of 2008                             -3-<\/span><\/p>\n
Narender Goyal, the person in whose presence the bribe was allegedly paid<\/p>\n
was also not examined in the departmental proceedings.<\/p>\n
            A perusal of the departmental enquiry report dated 30.1.2007<\/p>\n
(Annexure P-2) reveals that the following charges were required to be<\/p>\n
enquired into during departmental enquiry:-\n<\/p>\n
   1. He demanded a sum of Rs. 20,000\/- as illegal gratification and<\/p>\n
      accepted Rs. 5000\/- in advance from Sh. Jai Bhagwan (Consumer) on<\/p>\n
      1.9.2003 in lieu of theft of energy in his factory.<\/p>\n
   2. When Sh. Jai Bhagwan failed to pay balance amount of Rs. 15,000\/-<\/p>\n
      he raided the factory owned by Sh. Mohinder Pal brother of Sh. Jai<\/p>\n
      Bhagwan on 3.9.03 and found running factory unauthorisedly by<\/p>\n
      taking direct supply from main bypassing the meters despite the fact<\/p>\n
      that it was already disconnected in 4\/99 and police\/Court case was<\/p>\n
      pending in the court against Sh. Suresh Kumar & Jai Bhagwan vide<\/p>\n
      FIR No. 95 dated 16.4.1999 at Sampla. A penalty of Rs. 13,99,734\/-<\/p>\n
      was imposed upon the consumer but FIR was lodged against Sh. Jai<\/p>\n
      Bhagwan on 10.9.03 instead of within 72 hours of committing theft of<\/p>\n
      energy.\n<\/p>\n
   3. He used to get the theft of energy from the consumer after taking<\/p>\n
      monthly illegal gratification.\n<\/p>\n
            While deciding charge No. 1 it was held that it is evident from<\/p>\n
the record that petitioner was the then SDO (OP) Sampla and had not got<\/p>\n
the premises of the consumer checked. In case he had got the premises<\/p>\n
checked it could have been presumed that he had done so as the consumer<\/p>\n
has refused to pay the balance amount of Rs. 15000\/- out of Rs. 20,000\/-<\/p>\n
demanded as bribe money. The checking of the consumer premises was
\n Crl. Misc. No. M- 16124 of 2008                          -4-<\/span><\/p>\n
done by ADV Vigilance. Theft of energy was detected in the consumer<\/p>\n
premises earlier also in September, 2002 and both the theft cases are sub<\/p>\n
judice as the consumer has filed cases against the penalty in view of theft of<\/p>\n
energy in the District Consumer Redressal Forum, Rohtak and Additional<\/p>\n
District Judge, Rohtak It was also reported by the President\/Secretary of<\/p>\n
Industrial Association, Sampla that no incident had been reported to them<\/p>\n
regarding demand of illegal gratification from any industrial consumer.<\/p>\n
Hence, it was held that charge No. 1 was not proved.<\/p>\n
            With regard to charge No. 2, it was held that checking of<\/p>\n
consumer premises was made by vigilance on 3\/4.9.2003 and notice of<\/p>\n
penalty was served on the consumer on 4.9.2003. As per the said notice,<\/p>\n
consumer was given 72 hours to deposit the amount of penalty after receipt<\/p>\n
of notice. As per the instructions of the Nigam, the said period expired on<\/p>\n
7.9.2003 which was Sunday and hence, FIR was lodged with the police on<\/p>\n
9.9.2003 as it was taken that the consumer could deposit the amount in<\/p>\n
question up to 8.9.2003. Hence, it was held that there was no delay in<\/p>\n
lodging the FIR against M\/s Mohinder Pal Ice Factory, Sampla.<\/p>\n
            So far as charge No. 3 is concerned, it was held that the<\/p>\n
President\/Secretary, Industrial Association, Sampla had reported during<\/p>\n
discussion that no such demand was made by the petitioner for monthly<\/p>\n
illegal gratification from any consumer.\n<\/p>\n
            In the case of State of Haryana vs. Bhajan Lal,,<\/a> 1992 Supp<\/p>\n
(1) Supreme Court Cases 335, the Apex Court has held as under:-<\/p>\n
            “The following categories of cases can be stated by way of<\/p>\n
            illustration wherein the extraordinary power under Article 226<\/p>\n
            or the inherent powers under Section 482, Cr.P.C. Can be
\n Crl. Misc. No. M- 16124 of 2008                        -5-<\/span><\/p>\n
           exercised by the High Court either to prevent abuse of the<\/p>\n
           process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice,<\/p>\n
           though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly<\/p>\n
           defined and sufficiently chennelised and inflexible guidelines<\/p>\n
           or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds<\/p>\n
           of cases wherein such power should be exercised:-<\/p>\n
           (1)Where the allegations made in the first information report or<\/p>\n
             the complainant, even if they are taken at their face value and<\/p>\n
             accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any<\/p>\n
             offence or make out a case against the accused.<\/p>\n
           (2)Where the allegations in the first information report and<\/p>\n
             other materials, if any, accompanying the FIR do not disclose<\/p>\n
             a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police<\/p>\n
             officers under Section 156(1)of the Code except under an<\/p>\n
             order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of<\/p>\n
             the Code.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           (3)Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or<\/p>\n
             complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same<\/p>\n
             do no disclose the commission of any offence and make out a<\/p>\n
             case against the accused.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           (4)Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a<\/p>\n
             cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable<\/p>\n
             offence, no investigation is permitted by a Police Officer<\/p>\n
             without an order of Magistrate as contemplated under<\/p>\n
             Section 155(2) of the Code.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
           (5)Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so
\n Crl. Misc. No. M- 16124 of 2008                         -6-<\/span><\/p>\n
               absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no<\/p>\n
               prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is<\/p>\n
               sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.<\/p>\n
                  (6)Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of<\/p>\n
                  the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under<\/p>\n
                  which a criminal proceeding is instituted)to the<\/p>\n
                  institution and continuance of the proceedings and\/or<\/p>\n
                  where there is specific provision in the Code or the<\/p>\n
                  concerned Act, providing efficacious redress         for the<\/p>\n
                  grievance of aggrieved party.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                  (7)Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended<\/p>\n
                  with mala fide and\/or where the proceedings is<\/p>\n
                  maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for<\/p>\n
                  wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to<\/p>\n
                  spite him due to private and personal grudge.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
            In the present case FIR was lodged against the consumer<\/p>\n
regarding theft of energy vide Annexure P-4. Keeping in view the fact that<\/p>\n
in the departmental proceedings, petitioner was found innocent and the<\/p>\n
judgments cited above, the continuation of criminal proceedings would be<\/p>\n
nothing but abuse of process of Court. Non-examination of complainant<\/p>\n
and the person in whose presence the bribe money had been allegedly paid,<\/p>\n
in the facts and circumstances of this case is not material and would not<\/p>\n
vitiate the departmental proceedings.\n<\/p>\n
            In view of the above, this petition is allowed. FIR No. 2 dated
\n Crl. Misc. No. M- 16124 of 2008                      -7-<\/span><\/p>\n
18.3.2005 under Sections 7, 13(1)D and 14 of the Act registered at Police<\/p>\n
Station SVB, District Rohtak and all consequential proceedings arising<\/p>\n
therefrom are quashed.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                               (SABINA)
\n                                                 JUDGE<\/p>\n
March 25, 2009
\nPARAMJIT\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Hari Mohan Mittal vs State Of Haryana on 25 March, 2009 Crl. Misc. No. M- 16124 of 2008 -1- In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Crl. Misc. No. M- 16124 of 2008 Date of Decision:March 25, 2009 Hari Mohan Mittal —Petitioner versus State of Haryana —Respondent Coram: HON’BLE […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-57566","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nHari Mohan Mittal vs State Of Haryana on 25 March, 2009 - 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\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Hari Mohan Mittal vs State Of Haryana on 25 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-03-24T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-03-08T22:35:05+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Hari Mohan Mittal vs State Of Haryana on 25 March, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-08T22:35:05+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1466,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009\",\"name\":\"Hari Mohan Mittal vs State Of Haryana on 25 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-03-24T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-08T22:35:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Hari Mohan Mittal vs State Of Haryana on 25 March, 2009\"}]},{\"@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":"Hari Mohan Mittal vs State Of Haryana on 25 March, 2009 - 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\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Hari Mohan Mittal vs State Of Haryana on 25 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-03-24T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-03-08T22:35:05+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Hari Mohan Mittal vs State Of Haryana on 25 March, 2009","datePublished":"2009-03-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-08T22:35:05+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009"},"wordCount":1466,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009","name":"Hari Mohan Mittal vs State Of Haryana on 25 March, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-03-24T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-08T22:35:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/hari-mohan-mittal-vs-state-of-haryana-on-25-march-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Hari Mohan Mittal vs State Of Haryana on 25 March, 2009"}]},{"@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\/57566","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=57566"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/57566\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=57566"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=57566"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=57566"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}