{"id":96381,"date":"2008-12-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2008-12-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008"},"modified":"2015-07-29T08:38:22","modified_gmt":"2015-07-29T03:08:22","slug":"mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008","title":{"rendered":"Mohd. Sadiq vs State Of U.P. on 8 December, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Jammu High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Mohd. Sadiq vs State Of U.P. on 8 December, 2008<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU.             \nHC(W) No.32 of 2008  \nMohd. Sadiq \npetitioner\nState &amp; Ors.\nrespondents \n!Mr. N.P.Kotwal, Advocate\n^Mr. V.K.Chopra, AAG  \n\nMr. JUSTICE J. P. SINGH, JUDGE    \nDate : 08\/12\/2008\n:J U D G M E N T: \n<\/pre>\n<p>Mohd. Sadiq has filed this petition through his wife<br \/>\nGulshada Begum seeking quashing of District Magistrate,<br \/>\nDoda&#8217;s Order No.PSA\/DM\/JC\/06\/03 dated 07.03.2007<br \/>\ndirecting his detention under Section 8 of the Jammu and<br \/>\nKashmir Public Safety Act, 1978.\n<\/p>\n<p>Sh. N.P.Kotwal, appearing for the detenu submits that the<br \/>\nDistrict Magistrate had not supplied the detenu all the material<br \/>\nthat had been relied upon by him while contemplating issuance<br \/>\nof the impugned order and this omission, according to the<br \/>\nlearned counsel had thus disabled the detenu to make effective<br \/>\nrepresentation to the Government against his detention.<br \/>\nPetitioner&#8217;s detention, even otherwise, was illegal as there was<br \/>\nno material on records on the basis whereof it may be said that<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">2<\/span><br \/>\nthere was either any likelihood of detenu&#8217;s release on bail in<br \/>\nFIR No. 36\/2006 registered at Police Station Gool or indulging<br \/>\nin activities prejudicial to the security of the State when so<br \/>\nreleased. Learned counsel further urges that the impugned order<br \/>\nsuffers from non-application of mind as the detention order,<br \/>\nwhich appears to have been drawn on 07.02.2007 had been<br \/>\nshown to have been issued on 07.03.2007 and executed much<br \/>\nlater in June, 2007.\n<\/p>\n<p>Sh. V. K. Chopra, learned Additional Advocate General,<br \/>\nhas produced the detention records to justify petitioner&#8217;s<br \/>\ndetention. According to the learned State Counsel, as the<br \/>\nactivities of the petitioner were prejudicial to the security of<br \/>\nState, so the detention of the petitioner was warranted. He says<br \/>\nthat petitioner has not been prejudiced in any manner<br \/>\nwhatsoever because of the non-supply of the material which<br \/>\nhad been relied upon by the District Magistrate and the<br \/>\npetitioner&#8217;s detention did not suffer from any error of law.<br \/>\nI have considered the submissions of learned counsel for<br \/>\nthe parties and perused the records.\n<\/p>\n<p>Petitioner was in police custody in FIR No. 36\/2006<br \/>\nregistered at Police Station Gool under Sections 307\/121-A<br \/>\nRPC and 7\/27 Arms Act when the District Magistrate had<br \/>\ndirected his detention under Section 8 of the Jammu and<br \/>\nKashmir Public Safety Act on the ground that in the event of<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">3<\/span><br \/>\npetitioner&#8217;s release on bail he would influence and terrorize the<br \/>\nprosecution witnesses.\n<\/p>\n<p>The detention order, therefore, appears to have been<br \/>\npassed with a view to restrain the petitioner from influencing<br \/>\nand terrorizing the prosecution witnesses in the event of his<br \/>\nrelease on bail.\n<\/p>\n<p>Reason projected by the District Magistrate in detaining<br \/>\nthe petitioner in preventive custody is wholly unwarranted<br \/>\nbecause law may not permit curtailment of one&#8217;s liberty by the<br \/>\nauthorities under the Public Safety Act on grounds other than<br \/>\nthose which the legislature in its supreme wisdom has<br \/>\nprescribed under Section 8 of the Public Safety Act. The ground<br \/>\non which the District Magistrate had proceeded to direct<br \/>\npetitioner&#8217;s preventive detention being foreign to those<br \/>\nmentioned in Section 8 of the Public Safety Act, therefore,<br \/>\nrenders petitioner&#8217;s detention unsustainable.<br \/>\nThe records produced by learned State Counsel do not<br \/>\nindicate the existence of any material on the basis whereof it<br \/>\nmay be said that there was likelihood of petitioner&#8217;s release on<br \/>\nbail or otherwise from Police custody and when so released he<br \/>\nwas likely to indulge in activities prejudicial to the security of<br \/>\nState. In the absence of any such material, petitioner&#8217;s<br \/>\ndetention in preventive custody when he was already in Police<br \/>\ncustody cannot be justified in view of the law laid-down by<br \/>\nHon&#8217;ble Supreme Court of India in Surya Prakash Sharma<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">4<\/span><br \/>\nversus State of U.P., reported as 1994 SCC (Cr) 1691where<br \/>\nwhile dealing with a similar question their lordships of Supreme<br \/>\nCourt of India had observed as follows:-\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;The question as to whether and in what circumstances an<br \/>\norder for preventive detention can be passed against a<br \/>\nperson who is already in custody has had been engaging the<br \/>\nattention of this court since it first came for consideration<br \/>\nbefore a Constitution Bench in &#8220;<a href=\"\/doc\/225492\/\">Rameshwar Shaw vs.<br \/>\nDistrict Magistrate, Burdwan,<\/a>&#8221; To eschew prolixity we<br \/>\nrefrain from dealing all those cases except that the<br \/>\n<a href=\"\/doc\/1258899\/\">Dharmendra Suganchand Chelawat vs. Union of India<\/a><br \/>\nwherein three Judge Bench, after considering all the earlier<br \/>\nrelevant decisions including Rameshwar Shaw answered the<br \/>\nquestion in the following words:\n<\/p>\n<p>(SCC p.754, para 21)<br \/>\n&#8220;The decisions referred to above lead to the<br \/>\nconclusion that an order for detention can be validly passed<br \/>\nagainst a person in custody and for that purpose it is<br \/>\nnecessary that the grounds of detention must show that:\n<\/p>\n<p>i) the detaining authority was aware of the fact<br \/>\nthat the detenu is already in detention; and\n<\/p>\n<p>ii) there were compelling reasons justifying<br \/>\nsuch detention despite the fact that the detenu is<br \/>\nalready in detention. The expression &#8220;compelling<br \/>\nreasons&#8221; in the context of making an order for<br \/>\ndetention of a person already in custody implies that<br \/>\nthere must be cogent material before the detaining<br \/>\nauthority on the basis of which it may be satisfied<br \/>\nthat;\n<\/p>\n<p>a) the detenu is likely to be released from<br \/>\ncustody in the near future, and\n<\/p>\n<p>b) taking into account the nature of the<br \/>\nantecedent activities of the detenu, it is likely that<br \/>\nafter his release from custody he would indulge in<br \/>\nprejudicial activities and it is necessary to detain him<br \/>\nin order to prevent him from engaging in such<br \/>\nactivities.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>That apart, the petitioner does not appear to have been<br \/>\nsupplied the Police Dossier and the copies of the FIRs which<br \/>\nhad been relied upon by the learned District Magistrate while<br \/>\ncontemplating petitioner&#8217;s detention. This omission deprives<br \/>\nthe detenu of his right to make an effective representation<br \/>\nagainst his detention. This is so because effective representation<br \/>\nagainst detention may not be contemplated unless the detenu<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">5<\/span><br \/>\nwould know about the material which had entered the mind of<br \/>\nthe detaining authority while contemplating his detention.<br \/>\nSupplying of only grounds of detention minus the copies of FIR<br \/>\nand Police Dossier would thus violate petitioner&#8217;s statutory<br \/>\nright of making representation against his detention under<br \/>\nSection 13 of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act.<br \/>\nPerusal of the records further reveal that the District<br \/>\nMagistrate had proceeded to direct petitioner&#8217;s detention on the<br \/>\nbasis of Police Dossier which appears to have been drawn on<br \/>\nOctober 30, probably of the year 2006 because the Dossier<br \/>\ncontains only the date and month of its signing by<br \/>\nSuperintendent of Police Ramban and does not indicate the year<br \/>\nin which it had been prepared by the Superintendent of Police.<br \/>\nInterpolation in the impugned detention order too<br \/>\nindicates that the District Magistrate had exercised jurisdiction<br \/>\nin detaining the petitioner in a mechanical fashion. No reasons<br \/>\nare forthcoming from the records as to why there was delay of<br \/>\nnearly three months in execution of the detention order when<br \/>\nthe petitioner was already in police custody.<br \/>\nAll the aforementioned factors thus demonstrate that the<br \/>\nDistrict Magistrate had issued the impugned detention order<br \/>\nwithout application of mind and in violation of the<br \/>\nConstitutional and Statutory right of the petitioner depriving<br \/>\nhim of his right to make effective representation to the<br \/>\nGovernment against his detention. The detention order<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">6<\/span><br \/>\nimpugned in this petition is, therefore, liable to be quashed<br \/>\nbeing in violation of Article 22 (5) of the Constitution of India<br \/>\nreads with Section 13 of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety<br \/>\nAct.\n<\/p>\n<p>Allowing this petition, District Magistrate, Doda&#8217;s Order<br \/>\nNo. PSA\/DM\/JC\/06\/03 dated 07.03.2007, is, accordingly,<br \/>\nquashed. A direction would thus issue to the respondents to set<br \/>\nthe petitioner to liberty forthwith, if not, required in any other<br \/>\ncase.\n<\/p>\n<p>Detention records be returned to the State Counsel.<br \/>\n(J. P. Singh)<br \/>\nJudge<br \/>\nJammu.\n<\/p>\n<p>08.12.2008<br \/>\nPawan Chopra<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Jammu High Court Mohd. Sadiq vs State Of U.P. on 8 December, 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU. HC(W) No.32 of 2008 Mohd. Sadiq petitioner State &amp; Ors. respondents !Mr. N.P.Kotwal, Advocate ^Mr. V.K.Chopra, AAG Mr. JUSTICE J. P. SINGH, JUDGE Date : 08\/12\/2008 :J U D G M E [&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":[8,17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-96381","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-jammu-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Mohd. Sadiq vs State Of U.P. on 8 December, 2008 - 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\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mohd. Sadiq vs State Of U.P. on 8 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008\" \/>\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=\"2008-12-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-07-29T03:08:22+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\\\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Mohd. Sadiq vs State Of U.P. on 8 December, 2008\",\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-29T03:08:22+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008\"},\"wordCount\":1258,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Jammu High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008\",\"name\":\"Mohd. Sadiq vs State Of U.P. on 8 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2008-12-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-07-29T03:08:22+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mohd. Sadiq vs State Of U.P. on 8 December, 2008\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mohd. Sadiq vs State Of U.P. on 8 December, 2008 - 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\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mohd. Sadiq vs State Of U.P. on 8 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2008-12-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-07-29T03:08:22+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\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Mohd. Sadiq vs State Of U.P. on 8 December, 2008","datePublished":"2008-12-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-29T03:08:22+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008"},"wordCount":1258,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Jammu High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008","name":"Mohd. Sadiq vs State Of U.P. on 8 December, 2008 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2008-12-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-07-29T03:08:22+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/mohd-sadiq-vs-state-of-u-p-on-8-december-2008#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mohd. Sadiq vs State Of U.P. on 8 December, 2008"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/96381","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=96381"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/96381\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=96381"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=96381"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=96381"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}