{"id":80755,"date":"2009-09-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-09-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009"},"modified":"2017-09-17T08:35:26","modified_gmt":"2017-09-17T03:05:26","slug":"krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009","title":{"rendered":"Krishna Nandan Sharma &amp; Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 9 September, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Krishna Nandan Sharma &amp; Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 9 September, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI\n                        Cr. Rev. No. 556 of 2004\n            1. Krishna Nandan Sharma.\n            2. Sunuina Devi @ Kiran Devi.\n            3. Sidheshwar Singh.\n            4. Dinesh Chandra.          ... ...  ... ...Petitioners\n                               -Versus-\n            1. The State of Jharkhand.\n            2. Smt. Sunita Sinha.       ... ...  ... ...Opp. Parties\n                               ------------\n<\/pre>\n<pre>            CORAM:      THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K.SINHA\n\n\n            For the Petitioners:          M\/s Amaresh Kumar &amp; T.N.Mishra,\n                                          Advocates.\n             For the State:               Mr. Md. Hatim, A.P.P.\n             For the O.P.No.2:            Mr. K.N.Roy, Advocate.\n                                 ------------\n             C.A.V. on 17.08.2009               :      Pronounced on    09.09.2009\n                                 ------------\nD.K.Sinha,J.               The instant Cr. Revision is directed against the order\n<\/pre>\n<p>            impugned dated 31.05.2004 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial<br \/>\n            Magistrate, Hazaribagh in T.R.No.1113 of 2004 arising out of<br \/>\n            Hazaribagh Sadar P.S. Case No. 86 of 2003 by which the petition filed<br \/>\n            under Section 239 Cr.P.C. for the discharge of the petitioners was<br \/>\n            dismissed and the petitioners were called upon to stand charged under<br \/>\n            Section 498A\/406\/34 I.P.C. as also under Section \u00be of the Dowry<br \/>\n            Prohibition Act. The petitioners had earlier moved Cr. Misc. No.235 of<br \/>\n            2004 invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of<br \/>\n            the Code of Criminal Procedure against the order of cognizance of the<br \/>\n            offence taken by the Court and the said Cr. Misc. Petition was disposed<br \/>\n            of with the observation directing the petitioners to raise all the points at<br \/>\n            the time of framing of charge.\n<\/p>\n<p>            2.            The prosecution story as it stands narrated in the<br \/>\n            Complaint Case No. 163 of 2003 presented by the O.P.No.2 Smt. Sunita<br \/>\n            Sinha herein reveals that she was married to the petitioner No.4 Dinesh<br \/>\n            Chandra on 11.07.1997 and on the eve of marriage a sum of Rs.5 lakh<br \/>\n            was spent by her father. She was taken to her matrimonial home after<br \/>\n            marriage at Chirkunda where she lived peacefully for a month and<br \/>\n            thereafter she was taken back to her parental home. According to the<br \/>\n            family customs and rituals she returned back to her matrimonial home<br \/>\n            again at Chirkunda where she lived peacefully for 4 months. Her<br \/>\n            husband had a step mother and two step sisters and all the three began<br \/>\n            to create trouble in various ways by stating that she was not a suitable<br \/>\n            match for the husband petitioner No.4 herein and that her father had<br \/>\n            deceived by not giving adequate articles in the marriage. All the accused<br \/>\n            started perpetrating torture in various ways mentally as well as<br \/>\n            physically. Ultimately, demand of Rs.1 lakh was raised by them before<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>the complainant with the consensus of all the accused persons to be<br \/>\nbrought from her parental home otherwise they declared that she would<br \/>\nnot be allowed to stay in her matrimonial home. In the meantime, her<br \/>\nfather visited there to whom the complainant narrated her miseries and<br \/>\nalleged demand put to her but he expressed inability to meet out such a<br \/>\nhuge amount. However, he arranged Rs. 75,000\/- and paid it jointly to<br \/>\nthe father-in-law and grandfather-in-law of the complainant assuming<br \/>\nthat his daughter now would be kept with all dignity and honour. The<br \/>\ngrowing greed of the accused persons did not stop here and now they<br \/>\nput demand of motorcar and for that she was again mentally and<br \/>\nphysically tortured, made to starve for nights together and the members<br \/>\nof the family of her husband started treating her as maidservant. Finding<br \/>\nno way out her father took her to Hazaribagh and from there she was<br \/>\ntaken to Ranchi for her treatment of persisting ailment. Yet, none from<br \/>\nher matrimonial home came to see her. She was put under the treatment<br \/>\nof Dr. K.K.Sinha. It was alleged that when she was brought to her<br \/>\nmatrimonial home after she was cured, her in-laws became violent and<br \/>\nreacted by asking her father to take her back as he had failed to fulfil<br \/>\ntheir demand of car. As even her husband did not show sympathy and<br \/>\nthat she was completely neglected by her husband, her father brought<br \/>\nher back to Hazaribagh where she was living with her father. Her father<br \/>\ntried to resolve the differences, but of no avail, as the accused persons<br \/>\nwere adamant to re-marry her husband Dinesh Chandra to another girl<br \/>\nand having been aggrieved by such conduct of the accused persons,<br \/>\nshe filed complaint when the police refused to register a case.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.            Finally, it was alleged that the mother-in-law and other<br \/>\naccused persons retained all her ornaments, clothes, furniture and other<br \/>\nhousehold articles that were presented on the eve of her marriage. The<br \/>\nComplaint Petition was referred to the local police station for registration<br \/>\nof police case No.156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and to<br \/>\ninvestigate into the matter.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.            Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner pointed out<br \/>\nthat though the F.I.R. was registered against 8 named accused persons<br \/>\non the basis of the complaint but the Investigating Officer after<br \/>\ninvestigation submitted charge-sheet only against 4 accused persons<br \/>\nwho are the petitioners herein and in that manner the allegation levelled<br \/>\nagainst the accused persons by the complainant was partly disbelieved<br \/>\nby the Investigating Officer. As a matter of fact, the complainant was<br \/>\nmentally retarded and by suppressing this fact from the parents of the<br \/>\nbridegroom she was married to the petitioner No.4 Dinesh Chandra. The<br \/>\ncomplainant preferred the Complaint Petition on 15.02.2003 only after a<br \/>\nsuit was filed by the husband-petitioner against the complainant-\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">                             3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>O.P.No.2 before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad under<br \/>\nSection 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for the dissolution of the<br \/>\nmarriage on the ground that Sunita was mentally retarded much prior to<br \/>\nher marriage. Her abnormality could not be cured in spite of her<br \/>\ntreatment by Dr. K.K.Sinha at Ranchi as also by Dr. N.K.Banerjee,<br \/>\nfamous Neuro Psychiatrist at Kulti, Burdwan (West Bengal) in spite of all<br \/>\nthe cost having been borne by the accused persons incurred on her<br \/>\ntreatment.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.            Finally, learned Counsel submitted that it would be evident<br \/>\nfrom the Complaint Petition that the allegations were mainly directed<br \/>\nagainst the father-in-law and the husband either of perpetrating torture or<br \/>\nof receiving amount from the father of the complainant-O.P.No.2 to be<br \/>\ninvested in contract work as alleged in the complaint. Admittedly, the<br \/>\npetitioner No.2 Sunuina Devi @ Kiran Devi is the old step mother-in-law<br \/>\nand the petitioner No.3 is the old grandfather-in-law of the complainant<br \/>\nagainst whom there was omnibus allegation levelled by the complainant.<br \/>\nThe learned Counsel firmly pointed out that on similar set of allegation<br \/>\nthe step sisters-in-law though were exonerated from their criminal liability<br \/>\nas not being sent up for trial but the mother-in-law i.e. the petitioner No.2<br \/>\nherein is facing the rigours and ordeal of the alleged offence under<br \/>\nSection 498A I.P.C. Similar is the case with the petitioner No.3<br \/>\nSidheshwar Singh, who is a quite old person and is the grandfather-in-<br \/>\nlaw of the complainant, nothing to do with the family affairs of his son<br \/>\nand grandson, living in seclusion since long. Therefore, the learned<br \/>\nCounsel submitted that the learned S.D.J.M., Hazaribagh grossly erred<br \/>\nby not considering their case of discharge. As regards allegations<br \/>\nagainst the husband and father-in-law, the Counsel submitted that the<br \/>\nsame has been levelled as the counter product of the suit that has been<br \/>\nbrought about by the husband at the earlier point in time for dissolution<br \/>\nof his marriage with the complainant on the grounds that has got legal<br \/>\nsanction under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.\n<\/p>\n<p>6.            On the other hand, learned Counsel Mr. K.N.Roy<br \/>\nappearing for the Complainant-O.P.No.2 vehemently opposed the<br \/>\ncontention by submitting that all the four petitioners are equally liable for<br \/>\nthe miseries and the torture extended to the complainant in relation to<br \/>\ndemand of dowry. As a matter of fact, the complainant had suffered<br \/>\nmental shock and pressure on account of persistent demand of dowry in<br \/>\ncash and kind at the hands of the petitioners and others. Even she was<br \/>\nforced to starve for days together and left uncared and ultimately she<br \/>\nwas brought to Ranchi by her father and she underwent treatment in the<br \/>\ncare of Dr. K.K.Sinha. As a matter of fact, all the petitioners perpetrated<br \/>\ntorture and therefore, they do not deserve to be discharged keeping in<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                               4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>view the gravity of the allegation. It is not the fact that the Complaint<br \/>\nPetition was counter-blast of the suit that was brought about by the<br \/>\nhusband for the dissolution of his marriage but the complainant<br \/>\ndisplayed highest form of tolerance at their hands and when she came to<br \/>\nlearn that the accused persons have designed to re-marry her husband<br \/>\nwith another girl, she broke her silence and filed complaint. The<br \/>\npetitioners in no manner deserve sympathy of this Court for discharge.\n<\/p>\n<p>7.                Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I<br \/>\nfind that       there was direct allegation against the father-in-law, step<br \/>\nmother-in-law and the husband in the Complaint Petition and the<br \/>\ngrandfather-in-law has been arrayed as an accused only because he<br \/>\nwas the head of the family. I find substance in the argument that he<br \/>\nbeing the oldest person has got least interference in the family affairs of<br \/>\nhis son and he was not the ultimate beneficiary of Rs.75,000\/- which was<br \/>\nallegedly received by the father-in-law and husband for investment in the<br \/>\ncontract work. He was also not the ultimate beneficiary of the car that<br \/>\nwas demanded from the complainant and in this regard torture was<br \/>\nperpetrated to her by the other accused persons including the mother-in-<br \/>\nlaw, father-in-law and the husband. In view of the above discussions I do<br \/>\nnot find that a prima facie case is made out against the old grandfather-<br \/>\nin-law i.e the petitioner No.3 Sidheshwar Singh herein for the alleged<br \/>\noffence under Section 498A\/406\/34 I.P.C. as also under Section \u00be of the<br \/>\nDowry Prohibition Act. Contrary to that I find prima facie allegations<br \/>\nagainst the father-in-law Krishna Nandan Sharma, step mother-in-law<br \/>\nSunuina Devi @ Kiran Devi and the husband- petitioner No.4 Dinesh<br \/>\nChandra for the alleged offence and their Counsel failed to show any<br \/>\nconvincing ground for their discharge. I find that the order impugned<br \/>\ndated 31.05.2004 passed by the S.D.J.M., Hazaribagh in T.R.No.1113 of<br \/>\n2004 is well discussed which does not call for interference except what<br \/>\nhas been discussed in favour of the petitioner No.3 Sidheshwar Singh<br \/>\nreferred to hereinbefore who is discharged from criminal liability in the<br \/>\ninstant case. Otherwise the order impugned does not call for.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.                I do not find merit in this Cr. Revision accordingly it is<br \/>\ndismissed with observation discharging the petitioner No.3 Sidheshwar<br \/>\nSingh in the manner indicated above. Trial is directed to be expedited.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                          [D.K.Sinha,J.]<br \/>\nP.K.S.\/A.F.R.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jharkhand High Court Krishna Nandan Sharma &amp; Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 9 September, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 556 of 2004 1. Krishna Nandan Sharma. 2. Sunuina Devi @ Kiran Devi. 3. Sidheshwar Singh. 4. Dinesh Chandra. &#8230; &#8230; &#8230; &#8230;Petitioners -Versus- 1. The State of [&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":[8,18],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-80755","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jharkhand-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Krishna Nandan Sharma &amp; Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 9 September, 2009 - 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\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Krishna Nandan Sharma &amp; Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 9 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009\" \/>\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=\"2009-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-09-17T03:05:26+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=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Krishna Nandan Sharma &amp; Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 9 September, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-17T03:05:26+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1702,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jharkhand High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009\",\"name\":\"Krishna Nandan Sharma &amp; Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 9 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-09-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-17T03:05:26+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Krishna Nandan Sharma &amp; Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 9 September, 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":"Krishna Nandan Sharma &amp; Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 9 September, 2009 - 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\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Krishna Nandan Sharma &amp; Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 9 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-09-17T03:05:26+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":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Krishna Nandan Sharma &amp; Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 9 September, 2009","datePublished":"2009-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-17T03:05:26+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009"},"wordCount":1702,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jharkhand High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009","name":"Krishna Nandan Sharma &amp; Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 9 September, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-09-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-17T03:05:26+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/krishna-nandan-sharma-ors-vs-state-of-jharkhand-on-9-september-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Krishna Nandan Sharma &amp; Ors vs State Of Jharkhand on 9 September, 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\/80755","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=80755"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/80755\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=80755"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=80755"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=80755"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}