{"id":62277,"date":"2008-11-14T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-11-13T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008"},"modified":"2017-01-13T09:18:52","modified_gmt":"2017-01-13T03:48:52","slug":"ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008","title":{"rendered":"Ganga Ram vs State Of Punjab on 14 November, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n
Ganga Ram vs State Of Punjab on 14 November, 2008<\/div>\n
Criminal Revision No. 1378 of 1999                                   1\n\n           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA\n                         AT CHANDIGARH\n\n                                     Criminal Revision No. 1378 of 1999 (O&M)\n                                     Date of decision:- 14.11.2008\n\nGanga Ram                                            ...petitioner\n\n                           Versus\n\nState of Punjab                                      ...Respondent.<\/pre>\n
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH<\/p>\n
Present:     Mr. R.N. Raina, Advocate
\n             for the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
             Mr. Mehar Deep Singh, AAG, Punjab.\n<\/p>\n
\nRANJIT SINGH J.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
             The present revision petition is directed against the order<\/p>\n
passed by Special Judge, Faridkot dated           11.10.1999 whereby he has<\/p>\n
declined the application filed by the petitioner for his discharge on the<\/p>\n
ground that he was not liable to be prosecuted in the absence of sanction as<\/p>\n
needed under 197 Cr.P.C.\n<\/p>\n
             The petitioner alongwith six persons is being prosecuted for an<\/p>\n
offence under Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act and 420, 465,<\/p>\n
467, 120-B IPC. The allegation made in the FIR reveal that 40 killas of land<\/p>\n
was fraudulently sold by Society named Pucca Scheduled Caste Land<\/p>\n
Owning Co-op. Soceity Limited, Faridkot (in short Pucca Society). It is<\/p>\n
alleged that the petitioner had connived with other accused in this sale and<\/p>\n
that the sale price of the land mentioned in the sale deed has not been given<\/p>\n
to the said society. As per the allegations, Kirpal Singh, Secretary of the<\/p>\n
said society had allegedly got the resolution passed deceitfully in his favour<\/p>\n
and sold the said land through registered sale deed in favour of Surinder Pal
\n Criminal Revision No. 1378 of 1999                                  2<\/span><\/p>\n
Singh, his wife Baljit Kaur and his son Jaswinder Pal Singh. The petitioner<\/p>\n
at that time was working as Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Society at<\/p>\n
Faridkot. The petitioner is alleged to have misused his official position by<\/p>\n
giving sanction to the resolution allegedly passed by the society for the sale<\/p>\n
of   land after getting illegal gratification from Surinder Pal Singh.<\/p>\n
Allegation is that initially the petitioner had not accorded the approval to<\/p>\n
the said resolution but did so subsequently by recording office number on<\/p>\n
the said approval.\n<\/p>\n
             Challan has been presented against the petitioner and others.<\/p>\n
The petitioner filed an application for his discharge primarily contending<\/p>\n
that before taking cognizance of the offences in his case, it was legally<\/p>\n
necessary to obtain sanction from the government, as charges against the<\/p>\n
petitioner also included an offence under the Prevention of Corruption Act.<\/p>\n
This application for discharge, however, was declined which is now<\/p>\n
impugned in the present revision petition. The proceedings in this case was<\/p>\n
stayed on 1.11.1999 at the time of issuing notice of motion. This order<\/p>\n
continued till 30.10.2008 on which date the same was vacated. The order<\/p>\n
dated 30.10.2008 is reproduced below:\n<\/p>\n
                     “No one appears on behalf of the petitioner.<\/p>\n
                     In the interest of justice, adjourned to 14.11.2008.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
                     Interim   order    dated    1.11.1999,    staying      further\n\n             proceedings, is vacated.\n\n<\/pre>\n
                     Even otherwise the petitioner is accused of an offence<\/p>\n
             under the Prevention of Corruption Act where proceedings can<\/p>\n
             not be ordered to be stayed in terms of the law laid down by the<\/p>\n
             Hon’ble Supreme Court in Satya Narayan Sharma Vs. State
\n Criminal Revision No. 1378 of 1999                             3<\/span><\/p>\n
             of Rajasthan, 2001 Cri.L.J. 4640.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
                    Copy of the order be given dasti.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             The case has come up for hearing today. Besides submitting<\/p>\n
that sanction would be needed for prosecuting the petitioner the counsel<\/p>\n
pleads that the petitioner is being prosecuted without their being any<\/p>\n
allegation against him.       Counsel submits that facts would speak for<\/p>\n
themselves and would show that the petitioner did not do any act as<\/p>\n
Assistant Registrar for which he can be held responsible and prosecuted.<\/p>\n
Elaborating the same, the counsel contends that Pucca Society had passed<\/p>\n
the resolution dated 18.9.1992 for sale of 18 killa land to Surinder Pal Singh<\/p>\n
and others they being from Scheduled Castes. When this resolution put up<\/p>\n
to the petitioner in his capacity as Assistant Registrar, he made the<\/p>\n
following endorsement thereon:\n<\/p>\n
             “Further proceedings be done in accordance with the bye-laws<\/p>\n
             of the Society.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
             On the same very day the said resolution was again placed<\/p>\n
before the petitioner with the note that the sale was not in favour of the<\/p>\n
Scheduled Castes and sale could be made only to the Scheduled Castes.<\/p>\n
The petitioner thereafter immediately ordered that the resolution be<\/p>\n
rescinded. Another resolution dated 20.9.1992 which is referred to the<\/p>\n
second resolution concerning the sale of 40 acres of land in favour of<\/p>\n
Surinder Pal Singh and others, was never put up to the petitioner and as<\/p>\n
such he did not pass any order on the said resolution in his capacity as<\/p>\n
Assistant Registrar, Co-operative society, Faridkot. The petitioner and his<\/p>\n
co-accused are being prosecuted for conniving with the employees of the<\/p>\n
Pucca Society for selling this land which is alleged to be revealing alleged
\n Criminal Revision No. 1378 of 1999                              4<\/span><\/p>\n
offences against the petitioner. Counsel thus would contend that there is no<\/p>\n
material on record to proceed against the petitioner. He would also points<\/p>\n
out that no action was ever taken against the petitioner departmentally. He<\/p>\n
was never ever questioned or made to face any departmental proceeding.<\/p>\n
Naib Tehsildar, who was responsible for registering the sale deeds have<\/p>\n
been proceeded against and the sanction for his prosecution is already<\/p>\n
granted by the government. This is highlighted by the counsel to say that<\/p>\n
since the sanction has been obtained in respect of Tehsildar, it is not<\/p>\n
possible to take a view that sanction against the petitioner would not be<\/p>\n
needed. The petitioner is being accused of approving the resolution in his<\/p>\n
capacity as Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies i.e. public servant.<\/p>\n
Though there are allegations in the FIR that the petitioner did so by taking<\/p>\n
bribe but, as per the counsel, there is no material in this regard available.<\/p>\n
The connivance apparently is on the ground that the petitioner was<\/p>\n
responsible for approving the resolution passed by the Pucca Co-operative<\/p>\n
society. The fact that this resolution was rescinded by the petitioner does<\/p>\n
not appear to be in dispute. Can he still be held liable for doing anything in<\/p>\n
connection with this resolution. Counsel has also highlighted that the<\/p>\n
resolution regarding 40 killas was never put up to him and the allegation in<\/p>\n
the FIR are concerning 40 killas and not regarding 18 killas.<\/p>\n
             Apparently what has been urged above may prima facie<\/p>\n
indicate that the petitioner has not taken any action which may lead to<\/p>\n
commission of offence against him. However, it is job of the trial to see if<\/p>\n
sufficient material is available to frame a charge and proceed against the<\/p>\n
petitioner. Challan has been presented. Trial court is yet to apply its mind to
\n Criminal Revision No. 1378 of 1999                                5<\/span><\/p>\n
see if charges can be framed or not. In view of the stay granted by this Court<\/p>\n
the trial Court has not yet proceeded to see if the charge can be framed<\/p>\n
against any of the accused including the petitioner or not. It would be thus<\/p>\n
appropriate for the petitioner to raise all these pleas at the time of framing of<\/p>\n
charge. The Court would then take into consideration the facts collected<\/p>\n
during investigation. If the petitioner has not performed any role in his<\/p>\n
capacity as Assistant Registrar Society qua this resolution, obviously the<\/p>\n
Court would consider the same. This is not the job of this Court specially<\/p>\n
so when the petitioner has approached this Court before framing of charge<\/p>\n
and has got a stay of the proceedings. It would be thus appropriate to<\/p>\n
relegate the petitioner to appear before the trial Court and to raise all these<\/p>\n
pleas. Needless to mention that trial Court would be at liberty to frame<\/p>\n
charge if the Court is satisfied from the material collected that prima facie<\/p>\n
evidence exists to frame a charge against the accused.          If there is no<\/p>\n
evidence on material available on record even prima facie, then the Court<\/p>\n
may not go ahead to frame charge. All this is required to be seen by the trial<\/p>\n
Court. This Court cannot and has not sifted the material collected during<\/p>\n
investigation and has noted the contentions of the petitioner in this regard.<\/p>\n
             Before parting with this order, it needs to be observed that the<\/p>\n
petitioner had retired from the service on February, 1997. This FIR was<\/p>\n
registered on 9.6.1995. Ever since that date he is facing this prosecution.<\/p>\n
The petitioner is thus under the threat of trial and prosecution for nearly 13<\/p>\n
years. His pension and other pensionary benefits are also held up. The<\/p>\n
petitioner is justified in saying that he has suffered enough and is without<\/p>\n
resources. He is only getting a provisional pension. I deem it appropriate to<\/p>\n
impress upon and direct the trial Court to expedite the hearing of this case
\n Criminal Revision No. 1378 of 1999                             6<\/span><\/p>\n
and see if there is material to frame a charge against the petitioner and to<\/p>\n
proceed against him. Let the petitioner appear before the trial Court and<\/p>\n
raise all his pleas available to him in accordance with law.<\/p>\n
             With the above observation, the present revision petition is<\/p>\n
disposed of. Needless to mention that the petitioner would be still at liberty<\/p>\n
to approach this Court in case charge is framed against him.<\/p>\n
\n\n\n\n                                                   (RANJIT SINGH)\nNOVEMBER 14, 2008                                      JUDGE\nrts\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Punjab-Haryana High Court Ganga Ram vs State Of Punjab on 14 November, 2008 Criminal Revision No. 1378 of 1999 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 1378 of 1999 (O&M) Date of decision:- 14.11.2008 Ganga Ram …petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH […]<\/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-62277","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nGanga Ram vs State Of Punjab on 14 November, 2008 - 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\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ganga Ram vs State Of Punjab on 14 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-11-13T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-01-13T03:48:52+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\\\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ganga Ram vs State Of Punjab on 14 November, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-13T03:48:52+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1464,\"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\\\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008\",\"name\":\"Ganga Ram vs State Of Punjab on 14 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-11-13T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-01-13T03:48:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ganga Ram vs State Of Punjab on 14 November, 2008\"}]},{\"@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":"Ganga Ram vs State Of Punjab on 14 November, 2008 - 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\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ganga Ram vs State Of Punjab on 14 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-11-13T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-01-13T03:48:52+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\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ganga Ram vs State Of Punjab on 14 November, 2008","datePublished":"2008-11-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-13T03:48:52+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008"},"wordCount":1464,"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\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008","name":"Ganga Ram vs State Of Punjab on 14 November, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-11-13T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-01-13T03:48:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganga-ram-vs-state-of-punjab-on-14-november-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ganga Ram vs State Of Punjab on 14 November, 2008"}]},{"@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\/62277","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=62277"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62277\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=62277"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=62277"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=62277"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}