{"id":92980,"date":"2001-08-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2001-08-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001"},"modified":"2016-05-05T22:43:11","modified_gmt":"2016-05-05T17:13:11","slug":"ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001","title":{"rendered":"Ravinder Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 31 August, 2001"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Ravinder Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 31 August, 2001<\/div>\n
Author: Thomas<\/div>\n
Bench: K.T.Thomas, S.N.Variava<\/div>\n
           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (crl.) 881  of  2001\nSpecial Leave Petition (crl.)\t1118\t of  2001\n\n\n\nPETITIONER:\nRAVINDER KUMAR AND ANR.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF PUNJAB\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t31\/08\/2001\n\nBENCH:\nK.T.Thomas, S.N.Variava\n\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
THOMAS, J.\n<\/p>\n
\tLeave granted.\n<\/p>\n
A railway burial was contrived for eliminating the
\ncorpse of a business broker of Ludhiana. The coffin made
\nfor that purpose was camouflaged as parcel container to be
\ndespatched to a distant destination.  But the parcel
\nnarrowly missed from being consigned to the railway bogie
\nas some employees at the Parcel Service Center smelled
\nfoul.  The suspicion led to the disinterring of a strangled
\nbody which was later identified to be that of the aforesaid
\nbusiness broker.  Eventually it led to the detection of an
\norchestrated murder committed by the appellants.  The trial
\ncourt convicted the appellants for murder of the business
\nbroker besides the offences of abducting him and destroying
\nthe evidence.  They were sentenced to imprisonment for life
\non the main count and to lesser terms of imprisonment on
\nthe other two counts. A Division Bench of the High Court of
\nPunjab and Haryana confirmed the conviction and sentence as
\nper the judgment which is now being challenged.\n<\/p>\n
Amar Kumar Gupta (deceased) and his wife Veena were
\nliving with their two little daughters (Sonia and Dimple)
\nin their house at Ludhiana.  He was making his livelihood
\nthrough the brokerage earned by him in the business
\ntransactions with the manufacturers of hosiery goods.  It
\nappears that the two appellants were manufacturers of
\nhosiery articles at Ludhiana and the manufacturing concern
\nwas called “M\/s. Kapoor Knitting, Harbans Pura”, and they
\nhad engaged the deceased as a broker for the sale of goods
\nmanufactured in their concern. The amount which the
\nappellant owed to the deceased ranged around one lakh of
\nrupees by way of brokerage.\n<\/p>\n
Now the prosecution story can be narrated
\ncompendiously. On 2.2.1994 the appellant visited the house
\nof the deceased at about 11 A.M. and they had a
\nconversation, presumably about the brokerage claimed by the
\ndeceased or due to him. Appellants asked the deceased to go
\nwith them so that the accounts could be settled
\nconveniently.  Reciprocating the offer the deceased went
\nwith them.  He rode on a scooter along with Mohan Lal Jain
\n(PW-8) who was a close relative. As they reached the place
\nof the appellants deceased relieved PW-8 who was in a hurry
\nto go away for his own work.\n<\/p>\n
The vivid details of what all happened thereafter are
\nnot known except that at some time during the day the two
\nappellants murdered the deceased by strangulating him with
\na ligature.  They packed the dead body in a wooden
\ncontainer.  It was wrapped in a gunny bag, on the top of
\nwhich they scribbled the words “To self-Arun Goel; G-1 New
\nDelhi”.\t They engaged a rickshaw-puller to transport the
\ncontainer to the parcel service center adjoining the
\nRailway Station at Ludhiana. PW-5 Daya Ram (rickshaw-
\npuller) collected the load from the premises of M\/s. Kapoor
\nKnitting and transported it in his rickshaw to the
\naforesaid parcel service center.  The box was unloaded from
\nthe vehicle to the parcel building by the rickshaw-puller
\nwith the help of the two appellants and another person.\n<\/p>\n
Then the two appellants approached PW-11 who was one
\nof the partners of a parcel service firm and wanted to do
\nthe needful for booking the goods for being despatched to
\nNew Delhi.  It was 4.30 P.M. but they learnt that the next
\ngoods train available from that station would be only on
\nthe succeeding day.  However, PW-11 agreed that the goods
\nwould be despatched on the next day itself. But when the
\nParcel Supervisor weighed the load and found it to be 152
\nKgs. he felt something fishy about it. But by that time
\nboth the appellants had left the scene. So the container
\nwas kept outside the Parcel Office. Perhaps the staff at
\nthe parcel section felt that the load was something
\nsuspicious and hence they wanted to see what was inside the
\ncontainer.\n<\/p>\n
On 4.2.1994 the Chief Parcel Supervisor intimated the
\npolice about the suspicious container lying at their
\noffice. After the police reached, the container was opened
\nand all of them became stunned seeing a dead body with a
\nligature tied around its neck and the legs tied up with a
\nstring stuffed inside the box. The body was found wrapped
\nwith a black glazed paper and the box was wrapped with a
\ngunny bag on which the destination of the parcel was
\nscribbled as mentioned above.  The inquest was held by
\nPW-17 Boota Ram who was the Station House Officer, General
\nRailway Police Station (GRPS), Ludhiana.\n<\/p>\n
The police suspecting the appellants detailed a guard
\nat the house of the accused as both were absent from the
\nscene.\tOn 11.2.1994, the first appellant Ravinder Kumar
\nreturned to the house but when he noticed the presence of
\nthe police in the vicinity of his house he realised that he
\nwas within the penumbra of police suspicion.  He then ran
\naway from the place.  On the way he gulped some poison but
\nbefore he could die he was admitted in the CMC Hospital,
\nLudhiana. On 25.2.1994 he was arrested by the police when
\nhe was discharged by the hospital authorities.\n<\/p>\n
Appellant Surinder Kumar was arrested in connection
\nwith some other case on 2.5.1994 by the Jind Police.  When
\nPW-17 Boota Ram came to know of his arrest he proceeded to
\nthat station and took over the custody of appellant
\nSurinder Kumar after formally arresting him in connection
\nwith this case.\n<\/p>\n
The case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence.
\nThe trial court and the High Court concurrently found that
\nthe circumstances proved by the prosecution were quite
\nsufficient to establish that the deceased was murdered by
\nthe two appellants and that they tried to dislodge the
\ncorpse in such a manner as to escape from anybody’s
\nsuspicion.\n<\/p>\n
We have no doubt that the deceased Amar Kumar Gupta
\nwas murdered on 2.2.1994 by ligature strangulation and his
\nbody was packed up in a wooden container which was
\ncamouflaged as a parcel consignment. Nor has that aspect
\nbeen disputed by the appellants.  The sole question which
\nthe appellants seriously disputed was that they were the
\nkillers of the deceased.  To substantiate that appellants
\nwere the real murderers in this case prosecution has
\npresented the following circumstances:\n<\/p>\n
(1) Appellants had dealings with the deceased and a
\ngood sum was to be paid to the deceased by way of
\nbrokerage.\n<\/p>\n
(2) On 2.2.1994 appellants went to the house of the
\ndeceased and persuaded him to go with them up to
\ntheir house at Mohalla Taj Ganj situated in
\nHarbans Pura.\n<\/p>\n
(3) On the same evening appellants engaged PW-5 Daya
\nRam (rickshaw-puller) to transport a load wrapped
\nin a gunny bag from the factory of the appellants
\nat Harbans Pura to the parcel office of the
\nLudhiana Railway Station.\n<\/p>\n
(4) Appellants booked the parcel to be despatched to
\nNew Delhi on the same evening. When the parcel
\nemployees asked certain queries regarding the
\nheavy weight of the load appellants advanced
\nfalse excuses.\n<\/p>\n
(5) The container was opened and the dead body was
\ndisintered.  Since then the appellants remained
\nabsent from the locality itself for 14 days
\nhenceforth.\n<\/p>\n
(6) The appellant Ravinder Kumar immediately on
\nsmelling that police suspected him attempted to
\ncommit suicide.\n<\/p>\n
(7) On the information supplied by the said appellant
\nthe scooter of the deceased was retrieved from
\nthe premises of the Railway Station, Ludhiana.
\n(8) The clothes of the deceased were recovered by
\nPW-17 Investigating Officer on the basis of the
\ninformation elicited from appellant Ravinder
\nKumar.\n<\/p>\n
Both the courts found that the prosecution has
\nestablished the above circumstances with convincing and
\nreliable evidence. But learned counsel for the appellants
\ncontended that there are some basic infirmities which did
\nnot weigh with the two courts and those infirmities are
\nsufficient to disrupt the chain of circumstances.  He first
\ncontended that the FIR was inordinately delayed and that
\nitself is a vitiating factor.  His next contention was that
\nthe two courts did not consider how a rickshaw-puller would
\nremember, after many days, that a particular load was
\ntransported at the instance of the appellants.\tLastly, he
\ncontended that the appellants had no motive to murder the
\ndeceased, and even the suggestion made by the prosecution
\nfor that purpose remained unsubstantiated.  On these
\ngrounds he pleaded for interference with the conviction and
\nsentence passed on the appellants.\n<\/p>\n
The attack on prosecution cases on the ground of delay
\nin lodging FIR has almost bogged down as a stereotyped
\nredundancy in criminal cases.  It is a recurring feature in
\nmost of the criminal cases that there would be some delay
\nin furnishing the first information to the police. It has
\nto be remembered that law has not fixed any time for
\nlodging the FIR. Hence a delayed FIR is not illegal.  Of
\ncourse a prompt and immediate lodging of the FIR is the
\nideal as that would give the prosecution a twin advantage.
\nFirst is that it affords commencement of the investigation
\nwithout any time lapse.\t Second is that it expels the
\nopportunity for any possible concoction of a false version.
\nBarring these two plus points for a promptly lodged FIR the
\ndemerits of the delayed FIR cannot operate as fatal to any
\nprosecution case. It cannot be overlooked that even a
\npromptly lodged FIR is not an unreserved guarantee for the
\ngenuineness of the version incorporated therein.\n<\/p>\n
When there is criticism on the ground that FIR in a
\ncase was delayed the court has to look at the reason why
\nthere was such a delay.\t There can be a variety of genuine
\ncauses for FIR lodgment to get delayed.\t Rural people might
\nbe ignorant of the need for informing the police of a crime
\nwithout any lapse of time.  This kind of unconversantness
\nis not too uncommon among urban people also.  They might
\nnot immediately think of going to the police station.
\nAnother possibility is due to lack of adequate transport
\nfacilities for the informers to reach the police station.
\nThe third, which is a quite common bearing, is that the
\nkith and kin of the deceased might take some appreciable
\ntime to regain a certain level of tranquillity of mind or
\nsedativeness of temper for moving to the police station for
\nthe purpose of furnishing the requisite information.  Yet
\nanother cause is, the persons who are supposed to give such
\ninformation themselves could be so physically impaired that
\nthe police had to reach them on getting some nebulous
\ninformation about the incident.\n<\/p>\n
We are not providing an exhausting catalogue of
\ninstances which could cause delay in lodging the FIR.  Our
\neffort is to try to point out that the stale demand made in
\nthe criminal courts to treat the FIR vitiated merely on the
\nground of delay in its lodgment cannot be approved as a
\nlegal corollary.  In any case, where there is delay in
\nmaking the FIR the court is to look at the causes for it
\nand if such causes are not attributable to any effort to
\nconcoct a version no consequence shall be attached to the
\nmere delay in lodging the FIR. [Vide Zahoor vs. State of UP
\n(1991 Suppl.(1) SCC 372; Tara Singh vs. State of Punjab
\n(1991 Suppl.(1) SCC 536); Jamna vs. State of UP (1994 (1)
\nSCC 185). In Tara Singh (Supra) the Court made the
\nfollowing observations:\n<\/p>\n
“It is well settled that the delay in giving the
\nFIR by itself cannot be a ground to doubt the
\nprosecution case.  Knowing the Indian conditions
\nas they are we cannot expect these villagers to
\nrush to the police station immediately after the
\noccurrence.  Human nature as it is, the kith and
\nkin who have witnessed the occurrence cannot be
\nexpected to act mechanically with all the
\npromptitude in giving the report to the police.
\nAt times being grief-stricken because of the
\ncalamity it may not immediately occur to them
\nthat they should give a report.\t After all it is
\nbut natural in these circumstances for them to
\ntake some time to go to the police station for
\ngiving the report.”\n<\/p>\n
In the present case, no doubt, there is apparently a
\nlong delay of two days to give information to the police
\nbut the bereaved widow was not absolutely certain that she
\nlost her husband once and for all until her brother-in-law
\nconfirmed to her, after identifying the dead body, that the
\nsame was that of her husband.  The initial tension and
\nsuspense, undergone  by her would have billowed up into a
\nmassive wave of grief.\tIt is only understandable how much
\ntime a woman, placed in such a situation, would take to
\nreach some level of placidity for communicating to the
\nstrangers of what she knew about the last journey of her
\nhusband.  We therefore find no merit in the contention
\nbased on the delay of lodging the FIR.\n<\/p>\n
The second contention relates to the evidence of PW-5
\nDaya Ram (rickshaw-puller).  He remembered the two
\nappellants who engaged him to carry the load in his
\nrickshaw up to the railway station.  He also identified the
\nwooden box in which the load was packed, with the help of
\nthe scribblings made on it.  The contention is that it is
\nnot possible for any person, much less a rickshaw-puller
\nlike PW5, to remember who exactly employed him to carry a
\nparticular load on a particular day, after the lapse of
\nseveral days thereafter. This contention is raised
\noverlooking the psychological phenomenon that human memory
\nis very often a conditioned characteristic.  Anything which
\nhas any special or peculiar lineament can create an impact
\non the human mind lasting for long.  While it is true that
\nroutine events in a man’s day to day life may not remain in
\nhis mind for being remembered later, any odd or bizarre
\nhappenings involving him or in front of him have the
\ntendency to stick in his mind indelibly.  If there is any
\ncause for him to recollect such events again they get
\nrefreshed again.  That is why he is able to narrate such
\nevents with all details when asked to do so.  This applies
\nto all witnesses in criminal cases involving serious
\noffences.  Normally no porter or rickshaw-puller could
\nspeak from memory as to whom or whose load he carried many
\ndays ago.  But if the carrying of a load on a particular
\nday was soon followed by the flash of  sensational news in
\nthe locality – that the load contained the corpse of a
\nmurdered person, the instinctive reaction of the carrier is
\nto become inquisitive to know whether it was in respect of
\nthe load which he himself carried.  If that inquisitiveness
\nhad turned positive it is extremely probable that all the
\nvivid details relating to that event would stick in his
\nmemory.\t For him such event would not have been a usual
\noccurrence but extraordinarily odd and queer. Hence it is
\nnot likely to fade out of the canvass of his mind.  It will
\nbe unrealistic to jettison the testimony of such a witness
\non the mere ground that he could not have remembered after
\nthe lapse of long period the identity of the persons who
\nengaged him and also of the load which he carried.  We,
\ntherefore, repel such contention.\n<\/p>\n
The third contention is that the motive alleged by the
\nprosecution was not established and hence the area remains
\ngray as to what would have impelled them to liquidate the
\nbroker. No doubt it is the allegation of the prosecution
\nthat appellants owed a sum of Rs. one lakh to the deceased
\nand it might not have been possible for the prosecution to
\nprove that aspect to the hilt.\tNonetheless some materials
\nwere produced for showing that there were transactions
\nbetween the appellants and the deceased and that they had
\nsome account to be settled.  Only thus far could be
\nestablished but not further.  It is generally an impossible
\ntask for the prosecution to prove what precisely would have
\nimpelled the murderers to kill a particular person.  All
\nthat prosecution in many cases could point to is the
\npossible mental element which could have been the cause for
\nthe murder.  In this connection we deem it useful to refer
\nto the observations of this Court in State of Himachal
\nPradesh vs. Jeet Singh<\/a> {1999 (4) SCC 370}:\n<\/p>\n
“No doubt it is a sound principle to
\nremember that every criminal act was done
\nwith a motive but its corollary is not that
\nno criminal offence would have been
\ncommitted if the prosecution has failed to
\nprove the precise motive of the accused to
\ncommit it.  When the prosecution succeeded
\nin showing the possibility of some ire for
\nthe accused towards the victim, the
\ninability to further put on record the
\nmanner in which such ire would have swelled
\nup in the mind of the offender to such a
\ndegree as to impel  him to commit the
\noffence cannot be construed as a fatal
\nweakness of the prosecution.  It is almost
\nan impossibility for the prosecution to
\nunravel the full dimension of the mental
\ndisposition of an offender towards the
\nperson whom he offended.”\n<\/p>\n
An earlier decision of this Court in Nathuni Yadav vs.
\nState of Bihar {1998 (9) SCC 238}, which dealt with the
\nsame aspect, has been referred to therein and a passage
\ntherefrom has been extracted. We are, therefore, not
\npersuaded to change the tide on account of the inability of
\nthe prosecution to prove the motive aspect to the hilt.\n<\/p>\n
In the result we dismiss this appeal.<\/p>\n
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
\nCRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION<\/p>\n
     CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.  882\tOF    2001
\n(Arising from S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 904 of 2001)<\/p>\n
S. Nagalingam\t\t\t\t\t\t..\tAppellant<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\tVs.\n<\/p>\n
Sivagami\t\t\t\t\t\t\t..\tRespondent\n\n\n\nJ U D G M E N T\n\n\n\nK.G. BALAKRISHNAN, J.\n\n\n\tLeave granted.\n\n\n<\/pre>\n
\tThis appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single
\nJudge of the High Court of Madras in Criminal Appeal No. 486 of 1999
\nreversing the order of acquittal passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate,
\nMadras.\t  The learned Single Judge found the appellant guilty of the
\noffence under Section 494 IPC.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe appellant, S. Nagalingam married respondent-complainant
\nSivagami on 6.9.1970.\tThree  children were born  from that wedlock.
\nThe respondent alleged that the appellant started ill-treating her and on
\nmany occasions she was physically tortured.   As a result of  ill-treatment
\nand severe torture  inflicted\tby the appellant  as well as  his mother,  she
\nleft her marital home and started staying with her parents.   Whille so,  the
\nrespondent came to know that the appellant had entered into a marriage
\nwith another woman on 18.6.1984, by name Kasturi,  and that the
\nmarriage was performed in a Marriage Hall at Thiruthani.   The respondent
\nthen  filed a criminal complaint  before the Metropolitan Magistrate against
\nthe appellant and six others.\tAll the accused were acquitted by the trial
\ncourt.\tAggrieved thereby, the respondent  filed criminal appeal No. 67 of
\n1992  before the High Court of Madras.\t The  learned Single Judge, by
\nhis judgment dated 1.11.1996 upheld the acquittal of accused  2-7, but as
\nregards the acquittal of the appellant, the matter was remitted to the trial
\ncourt permitting the complainant to adduce evidence regarding the
\nmanner in which the marriage was solemnized.   Upon remand,   the
\nPriest\t[PW-3], who is\talleged to have performed the marriage of the
\nappellant with the second accused, Kasturi,  on 18.6.1984, was further
\nexamined and   the appellant was allowed further cross-examination.
\nThe learned Metropolitan Magistrate by his judgment dated 4.3.1999
\nacquitted the accused.\t    Aggrieved by the said judgment, the respondent
\npreferred  a criminal appeal before the High Court of Madras.\t By the
\nimpugned judgment, the learned Single Judge held that\tthe  appellant
\nhad committed the offence  punishable under Section 494 IPC.\t This is
\nchallenged before us.\n<\/p>\n
\tWe heard  Mr. R. Sundravardan, learned\tsenior counsel for the
\nappellant.   The respondent Sivagami appeared in person and she filed
\nsome documents in court.   Though she was offered the assistance of a
\ncounsel, she declined to avail\t herself  of   that opportunity.\n<\/p>\n
\tThe short question that arises for our consideration is whether the
\nsecond marriage entered into by\t appellant  with the second accused,
\nKasturi,  on 18.6.1984 was a  valid marriage under   Hindu Law so as to
\nconstitute an offence under Section 494 IPC.\n<\/p>\n
The    essential    ingredients\t of the offence under Section 494 IPC
\nare (I)\t the accused must have contracted the first marriage; (ii)  whilst the
\nfirst marriage was subsisting, the accused must have  contracted a
\nsecond marriage;  and (iii) both the marriages must be valid in the sense
\nthat necessary ceremonies governing the parties must  have been
\nperformed.\n<\/p>\n
Admittedly, the\t marriage  of the appellant with the respondent,
\nentered into by them on 6.9.1970,   was subsisting at the time of  the
\nalleged second marriage.    The Metropolitan Magistrate held that an
\nimportant ceremony, namely, “Saptapadi”\t had not been performed and
\ntherefore, the second  marriage was not a valid marriage and  no offence
\nwas committed by the appellant .  The learned Single Judge reversing this
\ndecision in appeal held that the parties are governed by Section 7-A of the
\nHindu Marriage\t  Act  as the parties are Hindus residing within the State
\nof Tamil Nadu.\t  It   was  held that there was a valid second marriage and
\nthe appellant was guilty of the offence of bigamy.\n<\/p>\n
In the complaint filed by the respondent, it was alleged  that the
\nappellant had contracted the second marriage and  this marriage was
\nsolemnised in accordance with the Hindu rites on 18.6.1984 at  RCC
\nMandapam, Tiruttani Devasthanam.   To support this contention, PWs 2 &
\n3 were examined.   PW-3 gave detailed evidence regarding the manner in
\nwhich the marriage on 18.6.1984 was performed.\n<\/p>\n
Learned counsel for the appellant contended that  as per the
\nevidence of PW-3, it is clear that “Saptapadi”, an important ritual which
\nforms part of the marriage ceremony, was not performed and therefore,
\nthere was  no valid marriage in accordance with\t Hindu\trites.\n<\/p>\n
It   is\t  undoubtedly\ttrue that the second marriage should be
\nproved to be a\tvalid marriage according to the personal law of the parties,
\nthough\tsuch second marriage is void under Section 17 of the Hindu
\nMarriage Act   having been performed when the earlier marriage is
\nsubsisting.   The validity of the second marriage is to be proved by the
\nprosecution by satisfactory evidence.\n<\/p>\n
In    Kanwal  Ram  &  Ors. vs. H.P. Administration   AIR 1966 SC
\n614  this   Court  held\t  that\t in   a\t   bigamy    case, the second marriage
\nis   to\t  be  proved  and  the\tessential ceremony required for a  valid
\nmarriage   should  have been performed.\t   It  was held that   mere
\nadmission on the part of the accused may not be sufficient.\n<\/p>\n
The question as to whether “Saptapadi” is an essential ritual to be
\nperformed,    came up  for   consideration   of this Court in some cases.
\nOne   of   the\t earliest   decisions\tof this Court is 1971 (1) SCC 864
\n[Smt. Priya Bala Ghosh vs. Suresh Chandra Ghosh<\/a>] wherein it was
\nheld that the second marriage should  be a valid one according to the law
\napplicable to the parties.   In that case, there was no evidence regarding
\nthe performance of the essential ceremonies, namely, “Datta Homa” and
\n“Saptapadi”.   In paragraph 25 of the judgment, it was held that  the
\nlearned Sessions Judge and the High Court  have categorically found that
\n“Homo” and “Saptapadi”\tare the essential rites for a marriage\t according
\nto the law governing  the parties and there is no evidence that these two
\nessential ceremonies have been performed when the respondent is stated
\nto    have   married Sandhya Rani.     It is pertinent to note that in
\nparagraph 9  of the judgment it is stated  that both sides agreed that
\naccording   to the law prevalent amongst the parties, “Homo” and
\n“Saptapadi” were essential rites to be\tperformed to constitute a valid
\nmarriage.    Before this Court also, the parties on either side agreed that
\naccording to the law prevalent among them, “Homo” and “Saptapadi” were
\nessential rites to be performed\t for  solemnization of the marriage and
\nthere was no specific evidence\t regarding the performance of these two
\nessential ceremonies.\n<\/p>\n
1979  (3)  SCC\t80   [Lingari Obulamma\tvs.  L. Venkata Reddy
\n& Ors.<\/a>]\t  was a\t case where the High Court held that two essential
\nceremonies of a valid marriage, namely\t“datta homa”  and “sapathapathi”
\n[taking seven steps around the sacred fire]  were not performed and,
\ntherefore, the marriage was void in the eye of law.    This finding  was
\nupheld by this Court.  The   appellant\ttherein contended that among the
\n“Reddy” community  in  Andhra Pradesh, there was no such custom of
\nperforming “datta homa” and “saptapadi”,  but the  High Court  held that
\nunder the Hindu Law these two ceremonies were essential to constitute a
\nvalid marriage\tand rejected the plea of the appellant\ton the ground that
\nthere was no evidence  to prove that any of these two ceremonies had
\nbeen performed.\t   The finding of the High Court was upheld by this Court
\nthat there was no evidence to prove a second valid marriage.\n<\/p>\n
In 1991 Supp. (2) SCC 616     [Santi Deb Berma vs. Kanchan
\nPrava Devi<\/a>]    also,  the appellant  was acquitted by this  Court as there
\nwas  no proof  of a valid marriage as the ceremonial “Saptapadi”  was  not
\nperformed.  This Court\tnoticed in this case  also that the High Court
\nproceeded on the footing that according to the parties, performance of
\n“Saptapadi” is one of the essential ceremonies to constitute a\tvalid
\nmarriage.\n<\/p>\n
Another\t    decision   on this point\tis   1994  (5)\tSCC   545
\n[Laxmi Devi  vs.  Satya Narayan & Ors.<\/a>] wherein, this Court, relying on
\nan earlier decision in\t[1971] 1 SCC 864 (supra),   held that there was\t no
\nproof that “Saptapadi”\twas performed and therefore, there was\tno valid
\nsecond marriage\t and that  no offence of bigamy\t was  committed.\n<\/p>\n
In  the\t aforesaid decisions rendered  by this Court,  it has been
\nheld  that  if the parties to the second marriage perform traditional Hindu
\nform of marriage,  “Saptapadi” and “Datta Homa”\t are essential
\nceremonies and\twithout there being these two ceremonies, there would
\nnot be a valid marriage.\n<\/p>\n
In the instant case,   the   parties to the second marriage, namely
\nthe appellant,\tNagalingam,  and  his alleged second wife, Kasturi,  are
\nresidents of  the State of Tamil Nadu  and their  marriage  was performed
\nat  Thiruthani Temple within the State of Tamil\t Nadu.\t  In the Hindu
\nMarriage Act, 1955, there is a State Amendment by the State of Tamil
\nNadu, which has been inserted  as Section 7-A.\t  The relevant portion
\nthereof\t is as follows :\n<\/p>\n
“7-A.  Special provision regarding suyamariyathai and
\nseerthiruththa marriages. — (1)  This section shall apply to
\nany marriage between any two Hindus, whether called
\nsuyamariyathai marriage or seerthiruththa marriage or by
\nany other name, solemnized in the presence of relatives,
\nfriends or other persons —\n<\/p>\n
(a) by each  party to the  marriage declaring in any language
\nunderstood by the parties that each takes the other to be his
\nwife or, as the case may be, her husband; or<\/p>\n
(b) by each party to the marriage garlanding the other or
\nputting a ring upon any finger of the other; or<\/p>\n
(c) by the tying of the thali.\n<\/p>\n
(2) (a) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 7, but
\nsubject to the other provisions of this Act, all marriages to
\nwhich this section applies  solemnized after the
\ncommencement of the Hindu Marriage (Madras Amendment)
\nAct, 1967, shall be good and valid in law.\n<\/p>\n
(b) Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 7 or in any
\ntext, rule or interpretation of Hindu law or any custom or
\nusage as part of that law in force immediately before the
\ncommencement of the Hindu Marriage (Madras Amendment)
\nAct, 1967,  or in any other law in force immediately before
\nsuch commencement in any judgment, decree or order of
\nany court, but subject to sub-section (3), all marriages to
\nwhich  this section applies solemnized at any time before
\nsuch commencement, shall be deemed to have been with
\neffect on and  from the date of the solemnization of each
\nsuch marriage, respectively, good and valid in law.\n<\/p>\n
(3)    ………………………………………\n<\/p>\n
\t(a)…………………………………..\n<\/p>\n
\t     (i) ……………………………….\n<\/p>\n
\t     (ii) ………………………………\n<\/p>\n
\t(b) ………………………………….\n<\/p>\n
\t(c) ………………………………….
\n(4) …………………………………………..”\n<\/p>\n
Section 7-A  applies to any marriage between two Hindus
\nsolemnized in the presence of relatives, friends or other persons.   The
\nmain thrust of this provision is that the presence of a priest is not
\nnecessary for the performance of a valid marriage.   Parties can enter into
\na marriage in the presence of relatives or friends or other persons and
\neach party to the marriage should declare in the language understood  by
\nthe parties that  each takes other to be his wife or,  as the case may be,
\nher husband, and the marriage would be\tcompleted by a simple
\nceremony  requiring    the parties to the marriage  to\tgarland each other
\nor put a ring upon any finger of the other or  tie a thali.   Any of these
\nceremonies, namely garlanding each other or putting a ring upon any
\nfinger\tof the other or tying a thali would be sufficient to complete a valid
\nmarriage.  Sub-section 2(a) of\tSection 7-A  specifically says that
\nnotwithstanding anything contained in Section 7, all marriages to which
\nthis   provision applies and solemnized\t after the commencement of the
\nHindu Marriage\t(Madras Amendment) Act, 1967 shall be good and valid
\nin law.\t    Sub-section 2(b) further says that notwithstanding anything
\ncontained  in  Section 7 or in any  text, rule or interpretation of Hindu law
\nor any custom or usage as part of that law in force immediately before the
\ncommencement of the Hindu Marriage (Madras Amendment) Act 1967, or
\nin any other law in force immediately before such commencement\tor in
\nany  judgment, decree or order of any court, all marriages to  which this
\nsection applies solemnized at any time before such commencement, shall
\nbe deemed to have been\tvalid.\t  The\t only\tinhibition  provided   is that
\nthis marriage  shall be subject to Sub-Section (3) of Section 7-A.   We
\nneed not elaborately consider the scope of  Section 7-A(3)  as that  is\t not
\nrelevant for our purpose.\n<\/p>\n
The evidence in this case as given by PW-3 clearly  shows  that
\nthere\t  was a valid marriage in accordance  with   the provisions of
\nSection 7-A of the Hindu Marriage Act.\t  PW-3 deposed that the
\nbridegroom brought the\t“Thirumangalam” and tied it around the neck of
\nthe bride and thereafter  the bride and the bridegroom exchanged
\ngarlands three times and  the father of the bride stated that he was  giving
\nhis daughter to\t “Kanniyathan” on behalf of and in the witness of
\n“Agnidevi” and the father of the bridegroom received and accepted the
\n“Kanniyathan”.\t      PW-3 also deposed that he performed the marriage in
\naccordance with the customs applicable to the parties.\n<\/p>\n
Under such circumstances, the provisions of Section 7-A, namely,
\nthe State Amendment inserted in the Statute are applicable and there was
\na valid marriage between the appellant and Kasturi.    Moreover, neither
\ncomplainant nor the appellant had any case that for a valid marriage
\namong the members of the community to which they belong, this
\nceremony of  “Saptapadi” was an essential one to make it a valid
\nmarriage.    Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act says that a Hindu
\nmarriage may be solemnized in accordance with the customary rites and
\nceremonies of either party thereto and where such rites and  ceremonies
\ninclude the Saptapadi, i.e. the taking of seven steps by the bridegroom
\nand the bride jointly before the sacred fire, the marriage becomes
\ncomplete and binding when the seventh step is taken.\n<\/p>\n
“Saptapadi” was held to be an essential ceremony for a valid
\nmarriage  only\tin cases  where\t  it was admitted by the parties  that as per
\nthe  form of marriage applicable  to them   that   was\t an  essential
\nceremony.     The appellant in the instant case, however, had no such
\ncase that  “Saptapadi” was an essential ceremony for a valid marriage as
\nper the personal law applicable whereas the provisions contained in
\nSection 7-A are applicable to the parties.  In any view of the matter, there
\nwas a valid marriage on 18.6.1984 between the appellant and the second
\naccused, Kasturi.  Therefore, it was proved that the appellant had
\ncommitted the offence of bigamy as it was done during the subsistence of
\nhis earlier marriage held on 6.9.1970.\n<\/p>\n
The learned Single Judge was right in holding that the appellant
\ncommitted the offence of bigamy and the matter was correctly remanded
\nto the trial court for awarding appropriate sentence.  We see no merit in
\nthis appeal and the same is dismissed accordingly.\n<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t………………………………..J
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t( D.P. Mohapatra )<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t………………………………..J
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t( K.G. Balakrishnan )
\nNew Delhi,
\nAugust 31,2001<\/p>\n
1<\/span><\/p>\n
12<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Ravinder Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 31 August, 2001 Author: Thomas Bench: K.T.Thomas, S.N.Variava CASE NO.: Appeal (crl.) 881 of 2001 Special Leave Petition (crl.) 1118 of 2001 PETITIONER: RAVINDER KUMAR AND ANR. Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF PUNJAB DATE OF JUDGMENT: 31\/08\/2001 BENCH: K.T.Thomas, S.N.Variava JUDGMENT: THOMAS, J. […]<\/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-92980","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nRavinder Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 31 August, 2001 - 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\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ravinder Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 31 August, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001\" \/>\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=\"2001-08-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-05-05T17:13:11+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=\"27 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ravinder Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 31 August, 2001\",\"datePublished\":\"2001-08-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-05T17:13:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001\"},\"wordCount\":5306,\"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\\\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001\",\"name\":\"Ravinder Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 31 August, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2001-08-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-05-05T17:13:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ravinder Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 31 August, 2001\"}]},{\"@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":"Ravinder Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 31 August, 2001 - 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\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ravinder Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 31 August, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2001-08-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-05-05T17:13:11+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":"27 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ravinder Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 31 August, 2001","datePublished":"2001-08-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-05T17:13:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001"},"wordCount":5306,"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\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001","name":"Ravinder Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 31 August, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2001-08-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-05-05T17:13:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ravinder-kumar-and-anr-vs-state-of-punjab-on-31-august-2001#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ravinder Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab on 31 August, 2001"}]},{"@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\/92980","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=92980"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/92980\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=92980"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=92980"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=92980"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}