{"id":8238,"date":"2009-11-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-11-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009"},"modified":"2018-08-22T04:25:58","modified_gmt":"2018-08-21T22:55:58","slug":"sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009","title":{"rendered":"Sampat Raj &amp; Ors vs State Of Raj. &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Rajasthan High Court &#8211; Jodhpur<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Sampat Raj &amp; Ors vs State Of Raj. &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>                                   1\n\n\n                               S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10592\/2009\n                           Sampat Raj &amp; Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan &amp; Ors.\n\n\n         S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10592\/2009\n                    Sampat Raj and others.\n                             vs.\n                State of Rajasthan and others.\n\nDATE OF ORDER: 16.11.2009\n\n                HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J.\n<\/pre>\n<p>Mr.S Saruparia, for the petitioners.<br \/>\nMr.SS Rajpurohit, for the respondents no.2 &amp; 3\/<br \/>\ncaveators.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                 &#8212;&#8212;\n<\/p>\n<p>       Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and<br \/>\nlearned        counsel    for     the     respondents       no.2     and<br \/>\n3\/caveators       who     have    filed     reply     to    the     writ<br \/>\npetition also.\n<\/p>\n<p>       The petitioners no.1 to 4 &#8211; Vice President,<br \/>\nTreasurer,       Parents&#8217;       member    and    Manager      of    Shri<br \/>\nGandhi     Shikshan        Samiti,       Gulabpura       (for      short<br \/>\n&#8216;Samiti&#8217;)       have     approached       this   Court     by   filing<br \/>\nwrit     petition         challenging        the      order        dated<br \/>\n7.10.2009 (Annex.P\/5) relating to the taking over<br \/>\nthe charge of the Samiti and with further relief<br \/>\nthat     the     respondent      no.2      may   be    directed       to<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                       2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                                  S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10592\/2009<br \/>\n                              Sampat Raj &amp; Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan &amp; Ors.\n<\/p>\n<p>handover the charge of Samiti immediately to the<br \/>\npetitioners and also prayed for direction against<br \/>\nthe respondents not to take any action regarding<br \/>\ndissolution of the management of the Samiti and<br \/>\nholding    fresh    election.             The   petitioners        further<br \/>\nprayed     that    directions             be    issued    against         the<br \/>\nrespondent       no.3    regarding          illegally      taking       over<br \/>\nthe     charge      of        the      samiti.          Probably,         the<br \/>\npetitioners meant for rehanding over of the charge<br \/>\nonly.\n<\/p>\n<p>      As   per    the     petitioners,            the     samiti     is     a<br \/>\nregistered        society             and       running         total      6<br \/>\ninstitutions         namely,              (1)     Gandhi         Shikshak<br \/>\nMahavidhyalaya ; (2) Gandhi Kanya Mahavidhyalaya ;<br \/>\n(3) Shri Gandhi Sharirik Mahavidhyalaya ; (4) Shri<br \/>\nGandhi Higher Secondary School ; (5) Shri Gandhi<br \/>\nPrimary    School       and     (6)    Shri      Gandhi       Science     and<br \/>\nTechnical Institution. The institutions no.4 and 5<br \/>\nare   aided      institutions          in      which    the    respondent<br \/>\nno.1 provides 90% grant and both the institutions<br \/>\nare     guided     by     the         Rajasthan          Non-Government<br \/>\nEducation     Institutions            Act,      1989.    The    remaining<br \/>\ninstitutions no.1 to 3 and 6 are self financed<br \/>\ninstitutions in which the respondent no.1 &#8211; State<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                      3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                                 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10592\/2009<br \/>\n                             Sampat Raj &amp; Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan &amp; Ors.\n<\/p>\n<p>do not have any grant or any aid is being given by<br \/>\nthe State.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The    respondent          no.1     issued       a    notice       under<br \/>\nSection 10(1) of the Act of 1989 to the Secretary<br \/>\nof the respondent no.2 and directed him to redress<br \/>\nthe     grievances          of      the     employees            of     aided<br \/>\ninstitutions &#8211; Shri Gandhi Higher Secondary School<br \/>\nand     Shri     Gandhi          Primary        School          with    clear<br \/>\nindication       that       otherwise       the        proceedings          for<br \/>\nappointment      of     Administrator           will       be    initiated.<br \/>\nUltimately,       the       respondent          no.1       appointed        the<br \/>\nAdministrator          by     issuing       order           on    6.10.2009<br \/>\n(Annex.P\/4). The order is in relation to above two<br \/>\naided institutions of the Samiti. According to the<br \/>\npetitioners, the Administrator in the garb of the<br \/>\norder    dated      6.10.2009        took       over       charge      of   the<br \/>\nSamiti without there being any order of the State<br \/>\nGovernment       and    when       it     was    complained            by   the<br \/>\npetitioner no.4 by sending letter dated 15.10.2009<br \/>\n(Annex.P\/7),        then      the       State     Government           issued<br \/>\norder       dated       28.10.2009          (Annex.P\/8)                wherein<br \/>\nexplanation was sought from the Administrator as<br \/>\nto how he took over charge of the Samiti and it<br \/>\nwas directed that he should hand over charge to<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                  4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                             S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10592\/2009<br \/>\n                         Sampat Raj &amp; Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan &amp; Ors.\n<\/p>\n<p>the     Samiti       forthwith.         According          to        the<br \/>\npetitioners,         inspite       of       the    order         dated<br \/>\n28.10.2009, the Administrator did not hand over<br \/>\nthe charge of the Samiti and he gave false reasons<br \/>\nin the letter dated 4.11.2009 (Annex.P\/10).\n<\/p>\n<p>      The     petitioners&#8217;      contention        in    additional<br \/>\naffidavit is that now yet another order has been<br \/>\nissued on 10.11.2009 purporting to recognise the<br \/>\ncontinuation of the Administrator as Administrator<br \/>\nof    the   Samiti    and    the     said    Administrator           has<br \/>\nissued election notification for holding election<br \/>\nof the Samiti which is absolutely illegal.\n<\/p>\n<p>      The respondent no.2 &#8211; Administrator on behalf<br \/>\nof the Samiti as well as on his own behalf has<br \/>\nsubmitted reply to the writ petition and pointed<br \/>\nout    that    the    writ     petition       deserves          to   be<br \/>\ndismissed on the ground of suppression of facts<br \/>\nand documents as well as relevant resolutions from<br \/>\nthis Court and further because of misleading this<br \/>\nCourt to believe that the respondents took over<br \/>\ncharge of the society illegally.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Learned counsel for the respondents no.2 and 3<br \/>\npointed out that on 14.8.2009, a resolution was<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                    5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                               S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10592\/2009<br \/>\n                           Sampat Raj &amp; Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan &amp; Ors.\n<\/p>\n<p>passed by all the members of the Samiti condemning<br \/>\nthe conduct of the petitioner no.4 and the Samiti<br \/>\nrequested     for    appointment        of   Administrator.          The<br \/>\ncharge was handed over by the Samiti in writing to<br \/>\nthe   Administrator        on    7.10.2009        by   specifically<br \/>\nsaying that they are handing over charge of the<br \/>\nSamiti and it has been signed by the petitioners<br \/>\nno.1 to 3. The respondents also placed on record<br \/>\nother documents which are not very much relevant<br \/>\nfor the purpose of this writ petition.\n<\/p>\n<p>      From     the    facts       referred       above       and     the<br \/>\ndocuments placed on record by the respondents, it<br \/>\nis clear that the petitioners no.1 to 3 condemned<br \/>\nthe petitioner no.4 by taking a resolution of the<br \/>\nSamiti       and     all    sought       appointment          of     the<br \/>\nAdministrator, then acting upon that resolution in<br \/>\nwriting, handed over charge of the Samiti to the<br \/>\nAdministrator, then without explaining the reason<br \/>\nfor their joining hands with the respondent no.4<br \/>\nand   without        disclosing        these     resolutions         and<br \/>\nwithout placing on record these documents, have<br \/>\npreferred this writ petition to condemn their own<br \/>\nresolution and act. The petitioner no.4 also for<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                         6<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                                    S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10592\/2009<br \/>\n                                Sampat Raj &amp; Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan &amp; Ors.\n<\/p>\n<p>the reasons best known to him could join hands<br \/>\nwith the petitioners no.1 to 3 knowing it well<br \/>\nthat     his       conduct        has       been      condemned        by        the<br \/>\npetitioners no.1 to 3 to the extent that all the<br \/>\nmembers      of    the     executive          of      the    Samiti        had   to<br \/>\nresign       because       of     the       alleged         conduct    of        the<br \/>\npetitioner no.4. The petitioners are, therefore,<br \/>\nguilty       of        suppression          of     facts      and     material<br \/>\ndocuments         as    well    as    guilty          of    misleading this<br \/>\nCourt        by        projecting        that         the     Administrator<br \/>\nillegally took over the charge of the Samiti in<br \/>\nthe    garb       of    the    order     of      the       State    Government<br \/>\nwhereas in fact, the petitioners no.1 to 3 and the<br \/>\ncommittee         of    the     Samiti      itself         decided     to    have<br \/>\nAdministrator            for    their       Samiti          and    voluntarily<br \/>\nhanded over charge to the Administrator. The writ<br \/>\npetition of the petitioners, therefore, is a clear<br \/>\ncase of abuse of process of court.\n<\/p>\n<p>       The     resolution         passed         by    the        Samiti    dated<br \/>\n14.8.2009 neither could have been challenged by<br \/>\nthe petitioners no.1 to 3 nor they have challenged<br \/>\nthe handing over the charge of the Samiti to the<br \/>\nAdministrator and it has been projected that the<br \/>\nAdministrator has acted illegally. The petitioners<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                     7<\/span><\/p>\n<p>                                S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10592\/2009<br \/>\n                            Sampat Raj &amp; Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan &amp; Ors.\n<\/p>\n<p>    failed to explain their conduct as there is no<br \/>\n    pleading     as   to   under     what     circumstances,          the<br \/>\n    petitioners no.1 to 3 joined the petitioner no.4<br \/>\n    and the petitioner no.4 under what circumstances<br \/>\n    joined the petitioners no.1 to 3. This conduct of<br \/>\n    the petitioners disentitles them from any relief<br \/>\n    in equitable jurisdiction and, consequently, the<br \/>\n    writ petition of the petitioners is dismissed only<br \/>\n    on this ground.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                              (PRAKASH TATIA), J.\n<\/p>\n<p>S.Phophaliya\/-<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Rajasthan High Court &#8211; Jodhpur Sampat Raj &amp; Ors vs State Of Raj. &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2009 1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10592\/2009 Sampat Raj &amp; Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan &amp; Ors. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10592\/2009 Sampat Raj and others. vs. State of Rajasthan and others. DATE OF ORDER: 16.11.2009 HON&#8217;BLE [&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":[8,19],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8238","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-rajasthan-high-court-jodhpur"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Sampat Raj &amp; Ors vs State Of Raj. &amp; Ors on 16 November, 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\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sampat Raj &amp; Ors vs State Of Raj. &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-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=\"2009-11-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-21T22:55:58+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=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Sampat Raj &amp; Ors vs State Of Raj. &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-21T22:55:58+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1148,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009\",\"name\":\"Sampat Raj &amp; Ors vs State Of Raj. &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-11-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-21T22:55:58+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sampat Raj &amp; Ors vs State Of Raj. &amp; Ors on 16 November, 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":"Sampat Raj &amp; Ors vs State Of Raj. &amp; Ors on 16 November, 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\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sampat Raj &amp; Ors vs State Of Raj. &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-11-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-21T22:55:58+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":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Sampat Raj &amp; Ors vs State Of Raj. &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2009","datePublished":"2009-11-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-21T22:55:58+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009"},"wordCount":1148,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009","name":"Sampat Raj &amp; Ors vs State Of Raj. &amp; Ors on 16 November, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-11-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-21T22:55:58+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/sampat-raj-ors-vs-state-of-raj-ors-on-16-november-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sampat Raj &amp; Ors vs State Of Raj. &amp; Ors on 16 November, 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\/8238","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=8238"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8238\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8238"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8238"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8238"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}