{"id":93051,"date":"2009-12-16T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-12-15T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009"},"modified":"2018-11-06T10:25:32","modified_gmt":"2018-11-06T04:55:32","slug":"loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009","title":{"rendered":"Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak &#8230; vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 16 December, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jharkhand High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak &#8230; vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 16 December, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>               In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi\n\n                      W.P.(Cr.) No.319 of 2009\n\n               Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak Dorba........ Petitioner\n\n                      VERSUS\n\n               State of Jharkhand and others................... Respondents\n\n               CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD\n\n               For the Petitioner: Mr.Sidhartha Roy\n               For the State     : Mr. Jalisur Rahman, J.C. to G.P.III\n\nReserved on 14.12.2009                              Pronounced on        16.12.2009\n\n9. 16.12.09<\/pre>\n<p>.          Through this application seizure of a tractor, bearing engine<\/p>\n<p>               no.25352 G and chassis no.3492167 has been sought to be<\/p>\n<p>               quashed and consequently, prayer has also been made to direct<\/p>\n<p>               the respondents to release the said vehicle.\n<\/p>\n<p>                      The facts giving rise this application are that the Forest<\/p>\n<p>               Guard while was taking round in the forest, intercepted a tractor in<\/p>\n<p>               a forest area, bearing engine no.25352 G and chassis no.3492167,<\/p>\n<p>               when it was carrying away boulders taken out from the forest and<\/p>\n<p>               hence, the tractor loaded with boulders was seized. This petitioner<\/p>\n<p>               and other accused persons, who had indulged themselves in the<\/p>\n<p>               aforesaid crime, were seen fleeing away. Accordingly, offence<\/p>\n<p>               report was submitted putting allegation that the petitioner and<\/p>\n<p>               others have committed offence under Section 33 of the Indian<\/p>\n<p>               Forest Act. Subsequently, a confiscation proceeding was initiated<\/p>\n<p>               under Section 52 of the Indian Forest Act for confiscating the<\/p>\n<p>               tractor. In the said confiscation proceeding, an application, as per<\/p>\n<p>               the case of the petitioner, was filed for interim release of the<\/p>\n<p>               tractor but no order was passed and as such, the petitioner has<\/p>\n<p>               preferred this writ application whereby seizure of the tractor has<\/p>\n<p>               been sought to be quashed and at the same time, prayer has also<\/p>\n<p>               been made to direct the authorities to release the vehicle.<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                             2<\/span><\/p>\n<p>       Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that<\/p>\n<p>seizure of the tractor carrying stones said to have been taken out<\/p>\n<p>from the forest area was effected by the Forest Guard, who is<\/p>\n<p>below the rank of Range Officer an as such, he, in terms of the<\/p>\n<p>provision as contained in Section 52-D of the Indian Forest Act<\/p>\n<p>(Bihar Amendment), is not competent to make such seizure and<\/p>\n<p>once the seizure is held to be illegal, entire prosecution and even<\/p>\n<p>confiscation proceeding would be vitiated and, therefore, the<\/p>\n<p>tractor be directed to be released as that is the only source of<\/p>\n<p>livelihood of the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>       Learned counsel for the petitioner on the point of release of<\/p>\n<p>the vehicle has referred to a decision rendered in a case of<\/p>\n<p>Satrughan Singhal vs. State of Jharkhand and others [2009<\/p>\n<p>(2) East Cr. C 445 (jhr)]. Further a case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1404306\/\">State of Karnataka<\/p>\n<p>vs. K.Krishnan<\/a> [ 2000 (3) East Cr. C 1053 (SC)] and also a<\/p>\n<p>case of Section Forester and another vs. Mansur Ali Khan<\/p>\n<p>[2004(2) JCR 96 (SC)] were referred to.\n<\/p>\n<p>       The stand of the State, as has been taken in the counter<\/p>\n<p>affidavit, is that the petitioner, as per the allegation prima facie,<\/p>\n<p>seems to have committed offence under Section 33 of the Indian<\/p>\n<p>Forest Act as he was seen taking away the boulders taken out from<\/p>\n<p>the forest area on a tractor which on being intercepted was seized<\/p>\n<p>by the Forest guard under Section 52 of the Indian Forest Act<\/p>\n<p>(Bihar Amendment) and for the purpose of seizure, Forest Guard<\/p>\n<p>has been notified to the &#8216;Forest Officer&#8217; and as such, seizure cannot<\/p>\n<p>be said to be illegal and moreover, any illegality with respect to<\/p>\n<p>search and seizure of the vehicle or the forest produce will have<\/p>\n<p>no bearing on a confiscation proceeding and also over the criminal<\/p>\n<p>case which proposition of law has been laid down by the Patna<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                              3<\/span><\/p>\n<p>High Court in a case of Bijay Krishna Sahay vs. State of Bihar<\/p>\n<p>and others [1998(3) PLJR 429 (FB)].\n<\/p>\n<p>       Having head learned counsel appearing for the parties, I do<\/p>\n<p>not find any substance in the submission that search and seizure<\/p>\n<p>being effected by the Forest Guard is illegal, in view of the<\/p>\n<p>provision as contained in Section 52-D of the Indian Forest Act<\/p>\n<p>(Bihar Amendment) as under Section 52-D of the Act any Forest<\/p>\n<p>Officer not below the rank of Range Officer of forest or any Police<\/p>\n<p>Officer not below the rank of Sub-Inspector is not competent to<\/p>\n<p>effect search and seizure.\n<\/p>\n<p>       It be stated that Section 52 of the Indian Forest Act (Bihar<\/p>\n<p>Amendment) speaks about the seizure and its procedure for the<\/p>\n<p>property liable for confiscation whereas Section 52-D speaks about<\/p>\n<p>the power of entry, inspection, search and seizure. Here, it would<\/p>\n<p>be appropriate to refer to those sections 52 and 52-D as inserted<\/p>\n<p>by the Bihar Amendment which reads as follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>              &#8220;52. Seizure and its procedure for the property liable<br \/>\n              for confiscation &#8211; (1) When there is reason to believe<br \/>\n              that forest offence has been committed in respect of<br \/>\n              any forest produce, such produce together with all<br \/>\n              tools, arms, boats, vehicles, chains or any other<br \/>\n              article used in committing any such offence, may be<br \/>\n              seized by any Forest Officer or Police Officer.&#8221;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>              &#8220;52-D. Power of entry, inspection, search and seizure-<br \/>\n              Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law<br \/>\n              for the time being in force any Forest Officer not<br \/>\n              below the rank of Range Officer of Forest or any<br \/>\n              Police Officer not below the rank of a Sub-Inspector,<br \/>\n              may, if he has reasonable grounds to believe that any<br \/>\n              forest offence has been committed in contravention of<br \/>\n              this Act, enter upon, inspect and search any place,<br \/>\n              premises, appurtenances thereto, land, vehicles or<br \/>\n              boat and seize any illegal forest produce and all tools,<br \/>\n              arms, boats, vehicles, ropes, chains or any other<br \/>\n              article used in committing such offence.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>       Thus, Section 52 empowers the Forest Officer or the Police<\/p>\n<p>Officer to seize any forest produce, if there is reason to believe that<\/p>\n<p>a forest offence in respect thereof has been committed. This<\/p>\n<p>Section would cover the case where the Forest Officer finds that<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                            4<\/span><\/p>\n<p>forest produce has been or is being removed in contravention of<\/p>\n<p>law or where theft of forest produce has been or is being<\/p>\n<p>committed. In such a case, he can seize the forest produce<\/p>\n<p>together with vehicle. But if seizure of forest produce without<\/p>\n<p>inspection and\/or search is not possible, power of seizure under<\/p>\n<p>Section 52 cannot be availed of because it does not authorize<\/p>\n<p>inspection and search. On the other hand, Section 52-D deals with<\/p>\n<p>any forest offence under which any Forest Officer not below the<\/p>\n<p>rank of Range Officer or any Police Officer not below the rank of<\/p>\n<p>Sub-Inspector can, if he has reasonable grounds to believe that any<\/p>\n<p>forest offence has been committed, exercise any of the powers<\/p>\n<p>mentioned therein including the power of seizure.<\/p>\n<p>       In the instant case, the tractor in question was seized from<\/p>\n<p>the forest area while it was carrying boulders taken out from the<\/p>\n<p>forest and as such, the seizure falls within the purview of Section<\/p>\n<p>52 and not under Section 52-D of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>       In that view of the matter any seizure of the vehicle by the<\/p>\n<p>Forest Guard who has been notified as Forest Officer cannot be<\/p>\n<p>said to be illegal.\n<\/p>\n<p>       So far the question relating to release of the vehicle is<\/p>\n<p>concerned, it be stated that the Act itself has made a provision for<\/p>\n<p>interim release of the vehicle on the existence of certain conditions<\/p>\n<p>mentioned therein but that power to release the vehicle involved in<\/p>\n<p>a forest offence, as per the decision of the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court,<\/p>\n<p>should not be exercised casually.\n<\/p>\n<p>       In this regard, I may refer to a decision in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1404306\/\">State<\/p>\n<p>of Karnataka vs. K. Krishnan<\/a> [(2000) 7 SCC 80] wherein the<\/p>\n<p>Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court has spelt out the guidelines to be kept in<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">                                    5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>      mind while passing the order for release of the vehicle which is as<\/p>\n<p>      follows:\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>                    &#8221; The Courts cannot shut their eyes and ignore their<br \/>\n                    obligations indicated in the Act enacted for the<br \/>\n                    purposes of protecting and safeguarding both the<br \/>\n                    forests and their produce. The forests are not only<br \/>\n                    the natural wealth of the country but also protector of<br \/>\n                    human life by providing a clean and unpolluted<br \/>\n                    atmosphere. We are of the considered view that<br \/>\n                    when any vehicle is seized on the allegation that it<br \/>\n                    was used for committing a forest offence, the same<br \/>\n                    shall not normally be returned to a party till the<br \/>\n                    culmination of all the proceedings in respect of such<br \/>\n                    offence, including confiscatory proceedings, if any.<br \/>\n                    Nonetheless, if for any exceptional reasons a Court is<br \/>\n                    inclined to release the vehicle during such pendency,<br \/>\n                    furnishing a bank guarantee should be the minimum<br \/>\n                    condition. No party shall be under the impression that<br \/>\n                    release of vehicle would be possible on easier terms,<br \/>\n                    when such vehicle is alleged to have been involved in<br \/>\n                    commission of a forest offence. Any such easy release<br \/>\n                    would tempt the forest offenders to repeat<br \/>\n                    commission of such offences. Its casualty will be the<br \/>\n                    forest as the same cannot be replenished for years to<br \/>\n                    come.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>                    &lt;<\/p>\n<p>             From the above dictum, it is clear that when a theft is<\/p>\n<p>      involved in a forest offence, the same is not to be released to the<\/p>\n<p>      offender or the claimant as a matter of routine.             However, in<\/p>\n<p>      exceptional cases, one can pass order for interim release on the<\/p>\n<p>      existence of certain condition mentioned under Section 53 of the<\/p>\n<p>      Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>             In the instant case, the matter relating to interim release of<\/p>\n<p>      the vehicle, as per the averment made by the petitioner, is pending<\/p>\n<p>      before the confiscating authority, therefore, no order in this respect<\/p>\n<p>      warrants to be passed by this Court. However, since the matter is<\/p>\n<p>      pending    before   the    confiscating   authority,   the   confiscating<\/p>\n<p>      authority, respondent no.2 is hereby directed to dispose of the<\/p>\n<p>      matter relating to release of the vehicle in accordance with law<\/p>\n<p>      within a period of one month from the date of receipt or production<\/p>\n<p>      of a copy of this order.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Thus, this application is disposed of.\n<\/p>\n<pre>ND\/                                                      ( R. R. Prasad, J.)\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jharkhand High Court Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak &#8230; vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 16 December, 2009 In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi W.P.(Cr.) No.319 of 2009 Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak Dorba&#8230;&#8230;.. Petitioner VERSUS State of Jharkhand and others&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;. Respondents CORAM: HON&#8217;BLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioner: Mr.Sidhartha Roy [&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-93051","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>Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak ... vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 16 December, 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\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak ... vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 16 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-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=\"2009-12-15T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-11-06T04:55:32+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak &#8230; vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 16 December, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-06T04:55:32+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1571,\"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\\\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009\",\"name\":\"Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak ... vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 16 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-12-15T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-11-06T04:55:32+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak &#8230; vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 16 December, 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":"Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak ... vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 16 December, 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\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak ... vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 16 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-12-15T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-11-06T04:55:32+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak &#8230; vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 16 December, 2009","datePublished":"2009-12-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-06T04:55:32+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009"},"wordCount":1571,"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\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009","name":"Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak ... vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 16 December, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-12-15T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-11-06T04:55:32+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/loknath-rajak-loknath-rajak-vs-state-of-jharkhand-ors-on-16-december-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Loknath Rajak @ Loknath Rajak &#8230; vs State Of Jharkhand &amp; Ors on 16 December, 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\/93051","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=93051"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/93051\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=93051"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=93051"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=93051"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}