{"id":58617,"date":"1975-02-05T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1975-02-04T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975"},"modified":"2015-07-11T10:17:28","modified_gmt":"2015-07-11T04:47:28","slug":"bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975","title":{"rendered":"Bachan Singh vs Prithvi Singh & Ors on 5 February, 1975"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Bachan Singh vs Prithvi Singh & Ors on 5 February, 1975<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1975 AIR 926, \t\t 1975 SCR (3) 439<\/div>\n
Author: R S Sarkaria<\/div>\n
Bench: Sarkaria, Ranjit Singh<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nBACHAN SINGH\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nPRITHVI SINGH & ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT05\/02\/1975\n\nBENCH:\nSARKARIA, RANJIT SINGH\nBENCH:\nSARKARIA, RANJIT SINGH\nALAGIRISWAMI, A.\n\nCITATION:\n 1975 AIR  926\t\t  1975 SCR  (3) 439\n 1975 SCC  (1) 368\n\n\nACT:\nRepresentation\t of  the  People  Act\t1951--S.123(2)\t and\n(7)--Publication of posters with pictures of Prime  Minister\nand Chiefs of Staff--Whether amounts to undue influence.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe  appellant in his petition challenging the\telection  of\nthe  respondent\t alleged (1) that the  respondent  had\tbeen\nguilty\tof committing a corrupt practice under s. 123(7)  of\nthe  Representation of the People Act, 1951 in that  he\t had\nobtained  the assistance of a member of the armed forces  in\nhis  election and (2) that he had distributed  posters\twith\nthe  pictures  of  the Prime Minister  and  other  important\nministers  together with the three chiefs and four  Generals\nof the Armed Forces bearing the caption 'Pillars of  Victory\nand thereby 'exercised undue influence within the meaning of\ns.123(2) of the Act.  The High Court dismissed the petition.\nDismissing the appeal to this Court.\nHELD  :\t (1) Since the deletion of the words  or  a  polling\nagent or a counting agent' from Explanation (2) of  s.123(7)\nby  the\t Amending  Act 47 of 1966, a  member  of  the  armed\nforces,\t merely by acting as a polling agent, is not  deemed\nto  assist  in\tthe  furtherance  of  the  prospects  of   a\ncandidate's election within the contemplation of s.123(7) of\nthe  Act.   Secondly,  the  Lance  Naik\t bad   categorically\nasserted  that he did the canvassing on his own and  not  in\nthe company of the respondent. [441 G]\n(2)  (a)  The  publication  of the, poster  was\t an  act  of\nimpropriety  but not one of corrupt practice falling  within\nthe mischief of s.123. Members of the armed forces spoken of\nin this clause mean persons in flesh and blood and not their\ninanimate photographs. [443 B]\n(b)  In\t one  sense  even  election  propaganda\t carried  on\nvigorously,  blaringly and systematically through  charismal\nleaders or through various media in favour of a candidate by\nrecounting the glories and achievements of that candidate or\nhis  political party in administrative or  political  field,\ndoes  meddle  with  and mould the  independent\tvolition  of\nelectors,  having  poor reason and little education  in\t the\nexercise of their franchise.  That such a wide\tconstruction\nwould  not  be\tin consonance with  the\t intendment  of\t the\nlegislature  is\t discernible  from the to  proviso  to\tthis\nclause.\t    The\t  proviso   illustrates\t  that\t  ordinarily\ninterference  with  the\t free exercise\tof  electoral  right\ninvolves  violence  or threat of injury of any kind  to\t any\ncandidate or an elector or inducement or attempt to induce a\ncandidate  or  elector\tto believe that he  will  become  an\nobject\tof  divine displeasure or  spiritual  censure.\t The\nprefix\t\"undue' indicates that there must be some  abuse  of\ninfluence.   'Undue influence is used in  contra-distinction\nto  'proper  influence.\t  Construed in\tthe'  light  of\t the\nproviso cl. 2 of s. 123 does not bar or penalize  legitimate\ncanvassing  or appeals to reason and judgment of the  voters\nor other lawful means of persuading voters to vote or not to\nvote  for a candidate.\tSuch proper and peaceful  persuasion\nis the motive force of our democratic process [442 E-G]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 186 of 1973
\nFrom  the judgment & Order dated the 27th November, 1972  of
\nthe Punjab & Haryana High Court in Election Petition No.  15
\nof 1972.\n<\/p>\n
Kapil  Sibal,  N.  D. Bhargava and S. K.  Gambhir,  for\t the
\nappellants.\n<\/p>\n
S. N.Marwah, Lalita Kohli, K. C. Dua and Naunit Lal, for the
\nRespondent No. 1<\/span>
\n440<\/span>
\nThe Judgment of the, Court was delivered by
\nSARKARIA, J. Prithvi Singh Azad (hereinafter referred to  as
\nthe  returned  candidate), Bachan Singh, Naurang  Singh\t and
\nLachchman  Singh  contested the election  to  Punjab  Vidhan
\nSabha  from  the Khanna\t (Reserved)  Assembly  constituency.
\nAzad was the nominee of the Congress Party and Bachan  Singh
\nof the Akali Dal.\n<\/p>\n
The poll was held on March 11, 1972. on March 12, 1972, Azad
\nwas  declared  elected.\t He secured  25,984  votes,  whereas
\nBachan Singh appellant No. 1 polled 24,865 votes.  The other
\ntwo forfeited their securities.\n<\/p>\n
On April 26, 1972, Bachan Singh, the unsuccessful  candidate
\nand ,one elector, Harcharan Singh, jointly filed an election
\npetition  under the Representation of the People  Act,\t1951
\nchallenging  the,  election  of the  returned  candidate  on
\nseveral grounds.  In the event of Azad’s election being\t set
\naside,\tBachan\tSingh claimed a\t further  declaration  under
\ns.101 of the Act of his own election.\n<\/p>\n
The  petition was dismissed by the High Court.\t Hence\tthis
\nappeal by the petitioners.\n<\/p>\n
Before us, only two grounds have been pressed into  argument
\nby Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned Counsel for the appellants.
\nFirstly,  it  is contended that the returned  candidate\t had
\nobtained  the assistance of one Lance Naik Gurdev  Singh,  a
\nmember of the Armed Forces of the Union, in his election and
\nwas thus guilty of ,committing the corrupt practice  defined
\nin s.123 (7).\n<\/p>\n
In  this connection, the petitioner tried to  establish\t two
\nfacts  : (a) that Lance Naik Gurdev Singh was  appointed  as
\nhis  polling agent by the returned candidate and the  former
\nacted as such at the polling station, Rahon Majra; (b)\tthat
\nthe  Lance Naik actually canvassed for votes in the  company
\nof the returned candidate.  In regard to the first fact, the
\npetitioners  relied upon the statement of L\/N Gurdev  Singh,
\nwho was examined as C.W.1., and the certified copy  Ex.P.W..
\n30\/4,  of  the Polling Agents’ Form.  Regarding\t the  second
\nfact,  they examined P.W.6 Subedar Bachan Singh, P.W.7\tBant
\nSingh  P.W.8 Bhagat Singh P.W.9 Rulda Singh, P.W.  10  Sadhu
\nSingh,\tP.W.  11 Bachan Singh P.W. 12 Arjan Singh,  P.W.  13
\nHaracharan  Singh.   They  also\t sought\t support  from\t the
\nstatement of C.W. 1.\n<\/p>\n
On  both these points, the learned Judge of the\t High  Court
\nfound  against the petitioners.\t In his opinion, the  person
\nwho had been appointed as his polling agent by the  returned
\ncandidate was another Gurdev Singh (RW2) and not L\/N  Gurdev
\nSingh  (C.W.  1).  He further held that\t the  oral  evidence
\nadduced by the petitioners to substantiate the allegation of
\ncanvassing  by\tthe  Lance  Naik  in  association  with\t the
\nreturned candidate, was of a partisan character, and in\t the
\nabsence of corroboration from any independent source,  could
\nnot be accepted.\n<\/p>\n
441<\/span><\/p>\n
Mr.  Sibal contends that the High Court grievously erred  in
\nholding\t that  it  was\tR.W.2 and not  C.W.1  who  had\tbeen
\nappointed   as\this,  polling  agent  by   the\t Respondent.
\nAccording to the Counsel, there are clinching  circumstances
\nin this case which show that it was Lance Naik Gurdev  Singh
\nwho had been appointed and acted as the polling agent of the
\nRespondent;  that the certified copy, Ex.P.W. 30\/1  obtained
\nby  the\t petitioner was a true copy of\tthe  original  Form.
\nR.W.2,\tit  is\tsubmitted, is an imposter  and\tthe  Polling
\nAgents’ Form P.W. 30\/4, was a false and fabricated document.
\nOnce  it  is held, proceeds the argument,  that\t L\/N  Gurdev
\nSingh  (C.W.1)\thad  acted  as\tthe  Polling  Agent  of\t the
\nRespondent, that would lend assurance to and probabilise the
\naccount given by P.Ws. 9 to 14.\n<\/p>\n
The contention cannot be accepted.\n<\/p>\n
Firstly, we do not think that the finding of the High  Court
\nthat  R.W.2-and\t not  C.W.1-was the  Polling  Agent  of\t the
\nRespondent,, an be said to be palpably wrong necessitating a
\nreappraisal of the evidence by this Court-.  Secondly,\teven
\non  the\t assumption  that L\/N Gurdev Singh  C.W.1,  was\t the
\nperson\twho  had been appointed as the\tpolling\t agent,\t the
\nevidence  on  the record was not sufficiently  clinching  to
\nbring home the charge to the Respondent.\n<\/p>\n
L\/N Gurdev Singh (C.W.1) himself had knocked the bottom\t out
\nof  the petitioner’s case.  The Lance Naik  while  admitting
\nthat he had canvassed for votes for the returned  candidate,
\ncategorically  asserted that the did such canvassing on\t his
\nown  and  not in the company of the respondent.\t  The  Lance
\nNaik was examined as a court witness.  The appellants had  a
\nright to cross-examine him.  But they did not avail of\tthis
\nright.\t They  did not put any question to  the\t witness  to
\nchallenge   his\t account.   L\/N\t Gurdev\t  Singhs   statement
\ntherefore,  that  he  had never canvassed  with\t or  at\t the
\ninstance of the returned candidate, would be deemed to\thave
\nbeen  accepted\tby them.  C.W. I was ‘the, keystone  of\t the
\narch  which the petitioners tried to build to  sustain\tthis
\ncharge.\t  Failure  of  C.W.I,  therefore,  to  support\t the
\npartisan  P.Ws. on all the material facts  constituting\t the
\ncharge, must lead to the collapse of whole arch.
\nMoreover,  since  the deletion of the words  “or  a  polling
\nagent or a counting agent” from Explanation(2) of s.  123(7)
\nby  the Amending Act 47 of 1966, a member of the Armed\tFor=
\nmerely by acting as a polling agent is not deemed to  assist
\nin  the\t furtherance  of  the  prospects  of  a\t candidate’s
\nelection within the contemplation of s.123(7).
\nWe  would therefore reject the first contention\t and  affirm
\nthe finding of the court below on this Issue.
\nThe next charge which has been agitated before us relates to
\nthe  poster, Esh.PW15\/1 which was published by\tthe  Pradesh
\nCongress  Committee.  It bore the photographs of  the  Prime
\nMinister  Smt.\t Indira Gandhi, Shri Jagjiwan  Ram,  Defence
\nMinister  and  Shri Swaran Singh, Foreign  Minister  in\t the
\nfirst  row.  Beneath the first row were the  photographs  of
\nthree  Chiefs  and four Generals of the\t Armed\tForces.\t  It
\nbore.  the caption “Pillars of.\t Victory”.  It\tis  alleged:
\nthat
\n442<\/span>
\nbelow  these photographs was printed the Congress symbol  of
\nCow  and  Calf.\t  On a complaint being\tmade,  the  Election
\nCommission of India moved in the matter and directions\twere
\nissued to the Punjab Pradesh Congress Committee to  withdraw
\nthe poster, which, in consequence, was withdrawn.
\nIn  his\t written statement, the returned  candidate  pleaded
\nthat  he  ‘was\tunaware\t of  any  such\tposter.\t  In  cross-
\nexamination, however, he (as R.W.6) admitted that the letter
\nEx.R.W.6\/1  had\t been  issued by S. P.\tMittal\tto  all\t the
\nPresidents  of\tthe District Congress  Committee  in  Punjab
\ndirecting them to withdraw this poster.\t R.W.6 admitted that
\nthis  poster  bore the photographs of Service  Chiefs  along
\nwith those of the Prime Minister and two other Ministers-all
\nof whom were described as Pillars of Victory.  He,  however,
\ndisclaimed that he had anything to do with the\tdistribution
\nof this poster.\n<\/p>\n
Mr.  Sibal contends that the publication of this poster\t not
\nonly  ,amounted to the exercise of “undue influence”  within
\nthe  contemplation  of\ts.123(2)_ but  also  constituted  an
\nattempt to obtain or procure assistance from the members  of
\nthe  Armed  Forces  of the Union for  fur  therance  of\t the
\nprospects  of the returned candidate’s election\t within\t the
\npurview of s.123(7).\n<\/p>\n
The contention is ingenious but unsustainable.
\nDoubtless the definition of ‘undue influence’ in sub-s.\t (2)
\nof s. 123 is couched in very wide terms, and on first  flush
\nseems  to  cover  every conceivable act\t which\tdirectly  or
\nindirectly interferes or attempts to interfere with the free
\nexercise  of  electoral right.\tIn one sense  even  election
\npropaganda    carried\ton   vigorously,    blaringly\t and
\nsystematically through charismal leaders of through  various
\nmedia in favour of a candidate by recounting the glories and
\nachievements  of  that candidate or his political  party  in
\nadministrative\tor  political field, does  meddle  with\t and
\nmould  the  independent volition of  electors,\thaving\tpoor
\nreason\tand  little  education, in  the\t exercise  of  their
\nfranchise.   That such a wide construction would not  be  in
\nconsonance  with  the  intendment  of  the  legislature\t  is
\ndiscernible  from the proviso to this ,clause.\tIle  proviso
\nillustrates  that  ordinarily  interference  with  the\tfree
\nexercise  of  electoral right involves\teither\tviolence  or
\nthreat of injury of any kind to any candidate or an  elector
\nor inducement or attempt to induce a candidate or elector to
\nbelieve that he will become an object of divine\t displeasure
\nor  spiritual  censure.\t The prefix ‘undue’  indicates\tthat
\nthere must be some abuse of influence.\tUndue influence’  is
\nused   in   contra-distinction\t to   ‘proper\tinfluences’.
\nConstrued in the light of the proviso, clause (2) of S.\t 123
\ndoes not bar or penalize legitimate canvassing or appeals to
\nreason\tand judgment of the voters or other lawful means  of
\npersuading  voters to vote or not to vote for  a  Candidates
\nindeed\tsuch  proper and peaceful persuasion is\t the  motive
\nforce of our democratic process.\n<\/p>\n
We  are\t unable to appreciate bow the  publication  of\tthis
\nposter\tInterfered, or was calculated to interfere with\t the
\nfree  exercise of the electoral right of any person.   There
\nwas nothing  in. it which amounted
\n443<\/span>
\nto  a  threat  of injury or undue  inducement  of  the\tkind
\ninhibited by s. 123 (2).\n<\/p>\n
Nor  could  the publication of this poster fall\t within\t the
\nambit of s.123(7). The ‘members’ of the Armed Forces  spoken
\nof  in this Clause mean persons in flesh and blood  and\t not
\ntheir inanimate photographs.\n<\/p>\n
In  short,  the\t publication of the poster  was\t an  act  of
\nimpropriety  but not one of corrupt practice falling  within
\nthe mischief of s. 123.\n<\/p>\n
No other point has been argued before us.\n<\/p>\n
The appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t       Appeal dismissed.\n<\/p>\n
P.B.R.\n<\/p>\n
444<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Bachan Singh vs Prithvi Singh & Ors on 5 February, 1975 Equivalent citations: 1975 AIR 926, 1975 SCR (3) 439 Author: R S Sarkaria Bench: Sarkaria, Ranjit Singh PETITIONER: BACHAN SINGH Vs. RESPONDENT: PRITHVI SINGH & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT05\/02\/1975 BENCH: SARKARIA, RANJIT SINGH BENCH: SARKARIA, RANJIT SINGH ALAGIRISWAMI, A. CITATION: […]<\/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-58617","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nBachan Singh vs Prithvi Singh & Ors on 5 February, 1975 - 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\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bachan Singh vs Prithvi Singh & Ors on 5 February, 1975 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975\" \/>\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=\"1975-02-04T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-07-11T04:47:28+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=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bachan Singh vs Prithvi Singh & Ors on 5 February, 1975\",\"datePublished\":\"1975-02-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-11T04:47:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975\"},\"wordCount\":1681,\"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\\\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975\",\"name\":\"Bachan Singh vs Prithvi Singh & Ors on 5 February, 1975 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1975-02-04T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-11T04:47:28+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bachan Singh vs Prithvi Singh & Ors on 5 February, 1975\"}]},{\"@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":"Bachan Singh vs Prithvi Singh & Ors on 5 February, 1975 - 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\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bachan Singh vs Prithvi Singh & Ors on 5 February, 1975 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1975-02-04T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-07-11T04:47:28+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":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bachan Singh vs Prithvi Singh & Ors on 5 February, 1975","datePublished":"1975-02-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-11T04:47:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975"},"wordCount":1681,"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\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975","name":"Bachan Singh vs Prithvi Singh & Ors on 5 February, 1975 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1975-02-04T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-11T04:47:28+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bachan-singh-vs-prithvi-singh-ors-on-5-february-1975#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bachan Singh vs Prithvi Singh & Ors on 5 February, 1975"}]},{"@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\/58617","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=58617"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/58617\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=58617"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=58617"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=58617"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}