{"id":99919,"date":"1984-08-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1984-08-08T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984"},"modified":"2016-11-29T18:15:44","modified_gmt":"2016-11-29T12:45:44","slug":"nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984","title":{"rendered":"Nirmal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 August, 1984"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Nirmal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 August, 1984<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1984 AIR 1619, \t\t  1985 SCR  (1) 316<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Y Chandrachud<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Chandrachud, Y.V. ((Cj)<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nNIRMAL SINGH\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nSTATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT09\/08\/1984\n\nBENCH:\nCHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ)\nBENCH:\nCHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ)\nSEN, A.P. (J)\n\nCITATION:\n 1984 AIR 1619\t\t  1985 SCR  (1) 316\n 1984 SCALE  (2)115\n CITATOR INFO :\n F\t    1987 SC 695\t (9)\n F\t    1989 SC1565\t (16)\n\n\nACT:\n     Industrial Disputes  Act, 1947,  sec. 12  (5)-Order  of\nLabour\tCommissioner   refusing\t  to   refer   dispute\t for\nadjudication to Labour Court on the ground that the employee\nis not\ta \"workman\"  but  without  giving  reasons  for\t his\nfinding-Validity of.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n     The appellant  was dismissed  from the  post of \"Branch\nManager\"  by  respondent  No.  3,  Bank,  after\t an  inquiry\nrelating to  fraudulent encasement  of a  draft by  one Labh\nsingh. His  demand in  regard to his dismissal, was referred\nby the\tGovt. of  Punjab to  the Conciliation  Officer,\t who\nrecommended that  the appellant's  case should\tbe forwarded\nfor adjudication  on the question whether his dismissal from\nservice was  justified. The  Labour Commissioner, exercising\nthe powers  of the  State Government,  declined to refer the\ndispute to  the Labour\tCourt for  adjudication but  without\ngiving any reasons for his conclusion that the appellant was\nnot a  \"workman\". The  appellant challenged  before the High\nCourt the  decision  of\t the  Labour  Commissioner  in\twrit\npetition which was dismissed summarily. Hence this appeal.\n     The grievance  of the  appellant  is  that\t the  Labour\nCommissioner ought  to have  given reasons in support of his\ndecision.\n     Allowing the appeal,\n^\n     HELD: 1. All that the Labour Commissioner has stated in\nthe order  is that  the post  held by  the appellant did not\nfall within  the category  of \"workman\"\t but no\t reasons are\ngiven to  justify that\tconclusion. He\tought to  have given\nreasons why  he came to the conclusion that the appellant is\nnot a  \"workman\" within\t the meaning  of section 2(s) of the\nIndustrial Disputes Act, 1947. [319 D-E]\n     2. In  the instant case, the Court keeping in view that\nremanding the  matter to  the Labour Commissioner for giving\nhis  reasons   will  entail   delay,  directed\t the  Labour\nCommissioner, Chandigarh  to make  a reference either to the\nLabour Court or to the Industrial Tribunal u\/s. 12(5) of the\nIndustrial\n318\nDisputes Act  1947 for\tadjudication of\t the question  as to\nwhether the  dismissal of  the appellant from the service of\nthe Bank is legal and justified. [319 E-E]\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>     CIVIL APPELLATE  JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1746 of<br \/>\n1980.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Appeal by\tSpecial leave  from the\t Judgment and  Order<br \/>\ndated the 4th September, 1979 of the Punjab and Haryana High<br \/>\nCourt in Civil Writ Petition No. 2780 of 1979.\n<\/p>\n<p>     N.D.  Garg,   S.K.\t Bisaria   and\tT.L.  Garg  for\t the<br \/>\nappellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>     Girish Chandra for Respondent No. 3.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\n     CHANDRACHUD, C.  J. In  April 1962,  the appellant\t was<br \/>\nappointed as  a clerk in the Hoshiarpur Central Co-operative<br \/>\nBank Ltd.,  which is  respondent 3 to this appeal. On August<br \/>\n10, 1976  he was  transferred as  &#8216;Branch  Manager&#8217;  of\t the<br \/>\nDholbaha branch\t of the\t Bank. On  October 22, 1977 one Labh<br \/>\nSingh s\/o  Harnam Singh\t opened an  account in\tthe Dholbaha<br \/>\nBranch under  an introduction given by one Bahram Singh. Two<br \/>\ndays later,  Labh Singh deposited in that account a draft in<br \/>\nthe sum\t of Rs.\t 5,000 issued by the Royal Bank of Canada on<br \/>\nthe Chartered  Bank, New  Delhi. The amount due on the draft<br \/>\nwas credited by the Bank in Labh Singh&#8217;s account on November\n<\/p>\n<p>14. On that very day, Labh Singh withdrew a sum of Rs. 2,500<br \/>\nfrom  his   account.  Three  days  later,  he  withdrew\t the<br \/>\nremaining amount  of Rs.  2,500. Soon  thereafter  a  person<br \/>\nclaiming to be the real Labh Singh in whose favour the draft<br \/>\nwas issued  by the  Royal Bank\tof Canada, complained to the<br \/>\nChartered Bank,\t New Delhi,  that the  draft was  stolen and<br \/>\nthat the money due thereon was fraudulently collected by the<br \/>\nperson in  whose name  an account was opened in the Dholbaha<br \/>\nbranch. On  November 10,  1978, the  Executive Committee  of<br \/>\nrespondent 3-Bank  resolved that  an  enquiry  be  held\t for<br \/>\nfixing\tresponsibility\tin  the\t matter\t of  the  fraudulent<br \/>\nencashment of  the draft.  The enquiry was held by the Chief<br \/>\nExecutive officer,  Satish Chander Dutt, who was of the rank<br \/>\nof the\tAssistant Registrar  in the Co-operative department.<br \/>\nAs a  result of\t the report  submitted by him, the appellant<br \/>\nwas dismissed from service on December 30, 1978.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The demand\t raised by  the appellant  in regard  to his<br \/>\ndismissal was  referred by  the Government  of Punjab to the<br \/>\nConciliation<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">319<\/span><br \/>\nofficer, who recommended that the appellant&#8217;s case should be<br \/>\nforwarded for  adjudication  on\t the  question\twhether\t his<br \/>\ndismissal   from   service   was   justified.\tThe   Labour<br \/>\nCommissioner of\t Punjab, exercising  the powers of the State<br \/>\nGovernment, declined  to refer\tthe dispute for adjudication<br \/>\non the\tground that  the appellant  was not  a workman.\t The<br \/>\nappellant filed\t a Writ Petition in the High Court of Punjab<br \/>\nand  Haryana,\tchallenging  the   decision  of\t the  Labour<br \/>\nCommissioner,  but   that  Writ\t  Petition   was   dismissed<br \/>\nsummarily. The\tappellant has  filed this  appeal by special<br \/>\nleave, challenging the decision of the High Court and of the<br \/>\nLabour Commissioner.  The State\t of Punjab  and\t the  Labour<br \/>\nCommissioner are respondents 1 and 2 to this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The grievance  made by  Shri N. D. Garg, who appears on<br \/>\nbehalf of  the appellant, that the Labour Commissioner ought<br \/>\nto have\t given\treasons\t in  support  of  his  decision,  is<br \/>\njustified. All\tthat the  Labour Commissioner  has stated in<br \/>\nthe order  is that  the post  held by  the appellant did not<br \/>\nfall &#8220;within  the category of workman&#8221;. This, really, is the<br \/>\nconclusion to  which the  Labour Commissioner  came  but  no<br \/>\nreasons are  given to justify that conclusion. We are of the<br \/>\nopinion that  the Labour  Commissioner ought  to have  given<br \/>\nreasons why  he came to the conclusion that the appellant is<br \/>\nnot a  &#8220;workman&#8221; within\t the meaning of section 2 (s) of the<br \/>\nIndustrial Disputes Act, 1947.\n<\/p>\n<p>     We\t could\thave  remanded\tthe  matter  to\t the  Labour<br \/>\nCommissioner  asking  him  to  state  his  reasons  why\t the<br \/>\nappellant is  not a  workman but,  that will  entail  delay.<br \/>\nInstead, it  is advisable from the point of view of not only<br \/>\nthe appellant  but the\tBank also  that a  deference is made<br \/>\neither to  the Labour  Court or\t to the\t Industrial Tribunal<br \/>\nunder section  12 (5)  of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947,<br \/>\nfor adjudication of the question as to whether the dismissal<br \/>\nof the\tappellant from the services of the Bank is legal and<br \/>\njustified. Accordingly,\t we direct  that the 2nd respondent,<br \/>\nthe Laboure  Commissioner, Chandigarh,\tto  whom  the  State<br \/>\nGovernment has\tdelegated its powers under section 12 of the<br \/>\nAct shall  make a reference to either of the two authorities<br \/>\nas he considers proper.\n<\/p>\n<p>     At one  stage, we\twanted to  decide for  ourselves the<br \/>\nquestion as  to whether\t the appellant is workman within the<br \/>\nmeaning of  section 2(s)  of the  Industrial  Disputes\tAct.<br \/>\nConsidering the time that has gone by, we wish that we could<br \/>\nhave decided  that question  but, on the material before us,<br \/>\nwe find\t it difficult to do so. The case of the appellant is<br \/>\nthat he is a mere matriculate who now possesses a some-\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">320<\/span><\/p>\n<p>what  exalted\tand  misleading\t designation  of  a  &#8216;Branch<br \/>\nManager.&#8217; According  to him,  there are\t 58 Branches  of the<br \/>\nBank in the District of Hoshiarpur, in 29 out of which there<br \/>\nare only  two officers,\t one of\t whom is  called the  Branch<br \/>\nManager and  the other\tthe Cashier.  He contends  that\t the<br \/>\nBranch Manager has no administrative or discretionary powers<br \/>\nto exercise  and is  not employed in a supervisory capacity.<br \/>\nHis case  is that  he  is  a  clerk  mis-called\t the  Branch<br \/>\nManager.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The contention of respondent 3-Bank, on the other hand,<br \/>\nis that\t not only was the appellant&#8217;s remuneration in excess<br \/>\nof Rs.\t500 per\t mensem but, being employed in a supervisory<br \/>\ncapacity, he  exercised functions  mainly  of  a  managerial<br \/>\nnature. It  is alleged\tthat he was vested with the power of<br \/>\nsuperintending\tthe   working  of  the\toffice,\t maintaining<br \/>\nregisters, sanctioning\tloans, receiving deposits, borrowing<br \/>\nwithin the  limits sanctioned  by the  Registrar,  incurring<br \/>\ncontingent expenditure,\t attending meetings  of the Board of<br \/>\nDirectors, the\tExecutive  Committee  and  other  Committees<br \/>\nconstituted under  the bye-laws\t and  certifying  copies  of<br \/>\nentries in the banker&#8217;s books.\n<\/p>\n<p>     The grievance of the appellant is that the Bank did not<br \/>\nraise any  contention before the Labour Commissioner that he<br \/>\nwas not\t a workman  within the\tmeaning of  the Act with the<br \/>\nresult that,  he had  no opportunity  to meet that case. The<br \/>\nparties have  included in  the\tpaper-book  before  us\tsome<br \/>\nmaterial  bearing   on\tthat   question\t but   it  will\t  be<br \/>\nunsatisfactory\tto   decide  that  question  without  proper<br \/>\nevidence.  After   all,\t the  question\tas  to\twhether\t the<br \/>\nappellant is  a &#8216;workman&#8217;  is basically\t a question of fact.<br \/>\nThat is\t why, on  the basis of the stray material before us,<br \/>\nwe do not consider it advisable to decide that question.\n<\/p>\n<p>     When this\tappeal was  argued before  us, a prosecution<br \/>\nwas pending in the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate,<br \/>\nHoshiarpur,  in\t  which\t three\t persons  were\tcharged\t for<br \/>\nimpersonation and cheating in connection with the fraudulent<br \/>\nencashment of  the draft  which led  to the dismissal of the<br \/>\nappellant. The\tappellant was  not only\t not included in the<br \/>\narray of the accused in that prosecution but the judgment of<br \/>\nthe learned  Magistrate dated  August 19,  1981\t shows\tthat<br \/>\nduring the  course of  investigation, it  was found that the<br \/>\nappellant was  not responsible\tfor the\t fraud. In fact, the<br \/>\nappellant was  examined as prosecution witness No. 4 in that<br \/>\ncase. Two  out of  the three  accused were discharged by the<br \/>\nlearned Magistrate  while  accused  No.\t 1,  Sham  Lal,\t was<br \/>\nconvicted under sections 419 and 420 of the<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">321<\/span><br \/>\nPenal  Code   and  was\t sentenced   to\t  undergo   rigorous<br \/>\nimprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.\n<\/p>\n<p>     At the instance of the Bank, a reference was made to an<br \/>\nArbitrator under  section  55  of  the\tPunjab\tCo-operative<br \/>\nSocieties Act,\t1961, for  deciding the question whether the<br \/>\nappellant is  liable to repay the amount of Rs. 5,000 to the<br \/>\nBank, which  was fraudulently withdrawn by Labh Singh. By an<br \/>\nAward dated  November 23,  1982 the Arbitrator dismissed the<br \/>\nreference, holding  that the  appellant was  not responsible<br \/>\nfor the\t fraudulent encashment\tof the draft. The Arbitrator<br \/>\nobserved that  the Bank\t could recover\tthe amount from Sham<br \/>\nLal, who  was convicted in the criminal proceedings, but not<br \/>\nfrom the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>     We have  referred to these two matters, the prosecution<br \/>\nand the\t arbitration proceedings, in order that the Bank may<br \/>\nexamine whether\t it is\tnot possible to drop the proceedings<br \/>\nagainst the  appellant and  take him  back in employment. If<br \/>\nthe Bank  finds that  the appellant  was merely negligent in<br \/>\nthe discharge  of his  duties as  a Branch  Manager, it\t may<br \/>\nconsider whether  the  appellant  could\t be  taken  back  in<br \/>\nemployment without the payment of full back wages.\n<\/p>\n<p>     For these\treasons, we  allow  the\t appeal\t and  direct<br \/>\nrespondent No.\t2, the\tLabour Commissioner,  Chandigarh, to<br \/>\nmake a Reference under section 12 of the Industrial Disputes<br \/>\nAct, 1947,  as directed\t by us.\t The reference shall be make<br \/>\nforthwith and  it shall\t be disposed  of within\t two  months<br \/>\nafter its receipt.\n<\/p>\n<p>     There will be no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>M.L.A.\t  Appeal allowed.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">322<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Nirmal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 August, 1984 Equivalent citations: 1984 AIR 1619, 1985 SCR (1) 316 Author: Y Chandrachud Bench: Chandrachud, Y.V. ((Cj) PETITIONER: NIRMAL SINGH Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT09\/08\/1984 BENCH: CHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ) BENCH: CHANDRACHUD, Y.V. ((CJ) SEN, A.P. [&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":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-99919","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Nirmal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 August, 1984 - 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\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Nirmal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 August, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984\" \/>\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=\"1984-08-08T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-11-29T12:45:44+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Nirmal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 August, 1984\",\"datePublished\":\"1984-08-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-29T12:45:44+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984\"},\"wordCount\":1482,\"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\\\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984\",\"name\":\"Nirmal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 August, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1984-08-08T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-11-29T12:45:44+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Nirmal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 August, 1984\"}]},{\"@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":"Nirmal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 August, 1984 - 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\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Nirmal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 August, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1984-08-08T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-11-29T12:45:44+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Nirmal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 August, 1984","datePublished":"1984-08-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-29T12:45:44+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984"},"wordCount":1482,"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\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984","name":"Nirmal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 August, 1984 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1984-08-08T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-11-29T12:45:44+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nirmal-singh-vs-state-of-punjab-and-ors-on-9-august-1984#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Nirmal Singh vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 August, 1984"}]},{"@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\/99919","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=99919"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/99919\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=99919"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=99919"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=99919"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}