diff --git "a/docstore.json" "b/docstore.json" deleted file mode 100644--- "a/docstore.json" +++ /dev/null @@ -1 +0,0 @@ -{"docstore/data": {"ef969ad2-9b55-423f-abd4-dd92fda2a7e0": {"__data__": {"id_": "ef969ad2-9b55-423f-abd4-dd92fda2a7e0", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "A482_11776_2023_of_AAFAK__MANJAR_AND_3_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11776_2023_of_AAFAK__MANJAR_AND_3_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 88942, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "7d539f8a-7c35-4001-aebb-277e01aed3c1", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "A482_11776_2023_of_AAFAK__MANJAR_AND_3_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11776_2023_of_AAFAK__MANJAR_AND_3_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 88942, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "0cdd8a7bd91f77e85c16d1f6efb138efa1df5158b748bcfe02a1a500fd9a6f7c", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:8758\nCourt No. - 11\nCase :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11776 of 2023\nApplicant :- Aafak Manjar And 3 Others\nOpposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And \n2 Others\nCounsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Tiwari\nCounsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashutosh Chaurasia,Chetan Kumar \nTiwari\nHon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.\n1. Heard. \n2. Present petition has been filed with the following prayer:-\n\"To quash the entire criminal proceeding initiated in pursuance of the\nimpugned charge sheet dated 28.5.2019 arising out of Case Crime\nNo.100/2019, (Under Sections-323, 504, 506, 452, 427, 354-A in respect\nof petitioner no.1) and (under sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 427 IPC in\nrespect of petitioner no.2 to 4) pertaining to Police Station -Ikauna,\nDistrict Shrawasti as well as cognizance/summoning order dated\n28.8.2019 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shrawasti in Case\nNo.2902/2019 (State Versus Aafak Manjar & Others) in terms of the\ncompromise deed dated 22.11.2023 presently pending in the court of Civil\nJudge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, FTC, Shrawasti, as\ncontained in Annexure No.1 and 2 to this Petition.\nIt is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay\nthe further proceeding initiated in pursuance of the impugned charge\nsheet dated 28.5.2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 100/2019, (Under\nSections-323, 504, 506, 452, 427, 354-A in respect of petitioner no.1) and\n(under sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 427 IPC in respect of petitioner no.2\nto 4) pertaining to Police Station -Ikauna, District Shrawasti as well as\ncognizance/summoning order dated 28.8.2019 passed by learned Chief\nJudicial Magistrate, Shrawasti in Case No.2902/2019 (State Versus Aafak\nManjar & Others) during the pendency of this Petition.\"\n3. This court has passed the order dated 04.01.2024 which reads\nas under:-\n\"1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGA for the\nState as well as Sri Chetan Kumar Tiwari, Advocate who has put in\nappearance on behalf of opposite parties nos. 2 and 3. \n2. Learned counsel for the parties have stated that the parties have\nentered into an agreement/compromise. \n3. The copy of agreement has been enclosed with the petition wherein the\nfirst part consists two parties, namely, Kishor Chandra @ Jaglal Soni and\nhis daughter and second part consists four parties, namely, Aafak Manjar,\nAshfaq Ahmad, Shakeel Ahmad and Hasamat Ullah Khan. As per\nverification report of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Fast Track\nCourt/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shravasti, dated 12.12.2023,", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 2699, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "f98a0ef1-8908-4f70-b8f5-543334b08cbf": {"__data__": {"id_": "f98a0ef1-8908-4f70-b8f5-543334b08cbf", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "A482_11776_2023_of_AAFAK__MANJAR_AND_3_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11776_2023_of_AAFAK__MANJAR_AND_3_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 88942, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "df8fd8f1-4b86-49b0-a465-9957363e4bd2", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "A482_11776_2023_of_AAFAK__MANJAR_AND_3_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11776_2023_of_AAFAK__MANJAR_AND_3_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 88942, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "c988905b5e1104062809989ebd192527680241e5c91e8583cc05523ff5b3b88a", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "the complainant/informant, Kishor Chandra @ Jaglal Soni and accused\npersons were present before the court for the purposes of verification but\nthe prosecutrix was not present, therefore, let the copy of verification\ndated 12.12.2023 and its covering letter dated 14.12.2023 be sent to Civil\nJudge, Senior Division, Fast Track Court/Additional Chief Judicial\nMagistrate, Shravasti to apprise the Court as to why the prosecutrix has\nnot been verified whereas she was also one of the parties of the\nagreement/compromise. \n4. List this case on 30.01.2024. On or before that date, the court\nconcerned at Shravasti shall file afresh report. \n5. Interim order to continue till the next date of listing.\"\n4. In compliance of the aforesaid order the Additional Chief\nJudicial Magistrate, Shravasti has submitted report dated\n25.01.2024 alongwith photocopy of the affidavit of the\nprosecutrix which is on record. The Court concerned has\nexplained the reason as to why the prosecutrix could not be\nverified earlier, however, the prosecutrix has appeared before\nthe Court concerned and has given her affidavit that she has\nalso entered into compromise and she is not willing to contest\nthe prosecution case.\n5. The Apex Court in re: Unnikrishnan alias Unnikuttan vs.\nState of Kerala, reported in (2018) 15 Supreme Court Cases\n343, has observed that even if the offence(s) in question is / are\nnot compoundable within the scope of Section 320 Cr.P.C. even\nthen considering the facts and circumstances of the case in\nquestion the Constitutional Court may allow the parties to\ncompound such offence(s) on the basis of compromise arrived\nat between the parties. \n6. Not only the above, considering the facts and circumstances\nof the issue in question and other dictums of the Apex Court in\nre: B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another;\n2003 (4) SCC 675, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10\nSCC 303; State of Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4\nSCC 149; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Deepak (2014) 10\nSCC 285; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Manish (2015) 8\nSCC 307; J.Ramesh Kamath vs. Mohana Kurup (2016) 12\nSCC 179; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rajveer Singh\n(2016) 12 SCC 471 and Parbatbhai Ahir vs. State of Gujarat\n(2017) 9 SCC 641 , the entire proceedings of the aforesaid\ncriminal case are hereby quashed in respect of the present\npetitioners. \n7. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. \nOrder Date :- 30.1.2024/Vipul", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 2525, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "237bc72a-2fca-44ad-95d1-9ecb49182fc9": {"__data__": {"id_": "237bc72a-2fca-44ad-95d1-9ecb49182fc9", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 54450, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "6d6886dd-40b7-4b84-ba68-d233d44b7962", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 54450, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "8cb7e477572ce2b261a9aed6869faf02af666b6c630cd4d299e51fa9ff38518c", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:513\nCourt No. - 27\nCase :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11793 of 2023\nApplicant :- Rohit Vishwakarma And Another\nOpposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And \nOthers\nCounsel for Applicant :- Sachin Pandey,Akhilesh Singh,Satyendra Kumar Tiwari\nCounsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Akhilesh Singh Chauhan\nHon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.\n1. Heard Sri Sachin Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the\napplicants, Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned Additional Government\nAdvocate and Sri Akhilesh Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for\nopposite party No.2 and perused the record. \n2. By means of the instant application, the applicant has sought\nquashing of the proceedings of Sessions Trial No.484 of 2023 arising\nout of Case Crime No.0436 of 2021 under Sections 363, 366 IPC,\n16/17 POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Sultanpur as\nwell as Charge-sheet No.1 dated 15.03.2023 pending before A.D.J.,\nCourt No.12, District Sultanpur. \n3. Aforesaid proceedings were initiated by means of an FIR lodged by\nopposite party No.2 on 01.10.2021 alleging that the applicant No.1\nhad enticed away informant's minor daughter on 29.09.2021. \n4. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.PC.,\nshe stated that she was aged about 18 years and she has studied up to\nHigh School. Her parents wanted to get her married to an old person\nagainst her wishes and for this reason, she had gone to Punjab, where\nthe applicant used to reside and she got employed with the help of the\napplicant No.1. She categorically stated that applicant No.1 did not\nentice her away and while living in Punjab, she started liking the\napplicant No.1 and has married him about a month ago. \n5. A copy of the High School Certificate of the victim has been\nannexed with the affidavit, which mentions her date of birth to be\n09.01.2004. The victim was taken for medico legal examination but", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1954, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "46ad205c-cb33-4cee-8687-532104ab1a9f": {"__data__": {"id_": "46ad205c-cb33-4cee-8687-532104ab1a9f", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 54450, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "57670fde-4e05-4f8a-9f39-17edb90067cd", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 54450, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "ffc930d6046b1851cf4660edf3bcaa9d81463b196b2e84b17e4b8ba3d80576d3", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "she declined to undergo the same and as per her medical examination\nfor ascertaining her age, she has been opined to be around 20 years\nold.\n6. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.\nalso, she stated that she had gone away on her own and while living in\nPunjab, she started liking the applicant No.1 and has married him\nabout a month ago and she wants to live with him only. \n7. Subsequently, the victim gave an application dated 23.02.2023 to\nthe Station House Officer stating that she has married the applicant\nNo.1 on 25.08.2022 and she has a son, aged about one and a half\nmonths, out of the said wedlock and the FIR has been lodged on the\nbasis of false allegation. The victim has given an affidavit also in\nsupport of this application and a copy of birth certificate of son of the\napplicant No.1 and the victim has also been annexed with the\naffidavit, which indicates that the victim has delivered a male child on\n09.01.2023. Subsequently, on 17.11.2023, opposite party No.2 has\nentered into compromise with the applicant No.1 stating that he does\nnot want to continue with the impugned proceedings against him. \n8. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and has submitted that\nsince the present case involves allegation of commission of offence\nunder Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, it cannot be\nquashed on the basis of compromise. \n9. When I examine merits of the case, it appears that on the basis of\nmaterial placed before the Court that the victim's father had alleged in\nthe FIR that the applicant No.1 had enticed away his daughter but the\nvictim's daughter categorically stated before the Investigating Officer\nas also before the Magistrate that she had gone away with her own and\nshe did not level any allegation of any misdeed committed by the\napplicant. She further stated that she has married the applicant and\nfrom the documents available before the Court, it appears that the\ninformant's daughter has delivered a son on 09.01.2023 out of\nwedlock with the applicant No.1.", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 2071, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "4bd4936c-549c-44be-83cd-8008ee4d9b33": {"__data__": {"id_": "4bd4936c-549c-44be-83cd-8008ee4d9b33", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "3", "file_name": "A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 54450, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "28ded781-337a-42bd-b334-06613bbc8ce5", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "3", "file_name": "A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 54450, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "1d238bd425b5ca03392b4cf0c29eb8e05c3be7650895a7c73cfb14965f628fb0", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "10. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, when\nthe applicant No.1 and the informant's daughter are leading a peaceful\nmatrimonial life together and the informant also does not want\ncontinuation of the proceedings against the applicant No.1; as per the\nmedico legal examination report, the victim was not a minor and,\ntherefore, the offence under Protection of Children from Sexual\nOffences Act are not made out against the applicant No.1, I am of the\nview that continuance of the criminal proceedings against the\napplicants will result in their persecution only and would defeat ends\nof justice.\n11. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the application deserves to be\nallowed. Accordingly, proceedings of Sessions Trial No.484 of 2023\narising out of Case Crime No.0436 of 2021 under Sections 363, 366\nIPC, 16/17 POCSO Act,Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District\nSultanpur as well as Charge-sheet No.1 dated 15.03.2023 pending\nbefore A.D.J., Court No.12, District Sultanpur are quashed.\n12. The application is allowed. \n(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) \nOrder Date :- 3.1.2024\nprateek", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1134, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "85359605-7e8a-4283-941a-d7f522a551f5": {"__data__": {"id_": "85359605-7e8a-4283-941a-d7f522a551f5", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "A482_11805_2023_of_BABLU__JUNED_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_HOME_DEPTT_LKO_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11805_2023_of_BABLU__JUNED_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_HOME_DEPTT_LKO_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 115548, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "210b2648-a0a5-49db-a8d2-869857a5e36f", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "A482_11805_2023_of_BABLU__JUNED_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_HOME_DEPTT_LKO_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11805_2023_of_BABLU__JUNED_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_HOME_DEPTT_LKO_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 115548, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "3d5bfa02e10e96a55804e579c06edb3bac6ca7caa5a97972c7b10a5a42502103", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:23133\nCourt No. - 11\nCase :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11805 of 2023\nApplicant :- Bablu @ Juned And 2 Others\nOpposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And \nAnother\nCounsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Dixit,Vinay Mishra\nCounsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Raman Mishra\nHon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.\n1. Heard Sri Dinesh Kumar Dixit, learned counsel for the\npetitioners, Sri Vishwanath Nishad, learned AGA for the State\nand Sri Ashish Raman Misra, learned counsel for the opposite\nparty no.2.\n2. By means of this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the\npetitioners have prayed for the following main relief: -\n\"WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may\nbe pleased to quash the impugned Charge sheet No. 01 dated 24.6.2020\nfiled by the Police of P .S. Jartwal Road, District Bahraich against the\npetitioners in respect of F .I.R. No. 0165/2020 U/S 498-A, 323 504 I.P .C.\nand 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act P .S. Jartwal Road, District Bahraich and\nthe summoning order dated 13.7.20 as contained in ANNEXURE NO. 1\nand 2 to this petition and also quash the entire proceedings of Criminal\nCase No. 7270/2020 State Versus Bablu alias Juned and others pending\nbefore the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bahraich and allow the instant\npetition in the interest of justice.\nAny other writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem just\nand proper under the circumstances of the case may kindly also be\npassed.\"\n3. This Court vide order dated 22.01.2024 directed the parties to\nappear before the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this\nCourt for settlement of their dispute through mediation.\n4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the parties appeared\nbefore the Mediation & Conciliation Centre of this Court and\nthe Mediators have submitted its report dated 15.02.2024,\nwhich is on record. The report of the Mediators dated\n15.02.2024 indicates that the mediation was successfully\ncompleted.\n5. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 has also submitted\nthat the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled\nthrough mediation.", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 2192, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "a9343030-12b2-4f1a-9bd6-cfe85b10ca22": {"__data__": {"id_": "a9343030-12b2-4f1a-9bd6-cfe85b10ca22", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "A482_11805_2023_of_BABLU__JUNED_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_HOME_DEPTT_LKO_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11805_2023_of_BABLU__JUNED_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_HOME_DEPTT_LKO_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 115548, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "a2e1691d-8440-4414-b1d2-c1f1dd1b9a24", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "A482_11805_2023_of_BABLU__JUNED_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_HOME_DEPTT_LKO_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11805_2023_of_BABLU__JUNED_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_HOME_DEPTT_LKO_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 115548, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "4b0f74c3b10bfd075f2afd0bcae4f02d2a25f471c73326a81e1ec6588def23a2", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "6. Learned counsels for both the parties have given undertaking\non behalf of the parties that the parties shall abide by all terms\nand conditions of the settlement agreement dated 15.02.2024.\n7. The Apex Court in re: Unnikrishnan alias Unnikuttan vs.\nState of Kerala , reported in (2018) 15 Supreme Court Cases\n343, has observed that even if the offence(s) in question is / are\nnot compoundable within the scope of Section 320 Cr.P.C. even\nthen considering the facts and circumstances of the case in\nquestion the Constitutional Court may allow the parties to\ncompound such offence(s) on the basis of compromise arrived\nat between the parties.\n8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the\nissue in question, particularly, the fact that the present petitioner\nand the private opposite party have settled the dispute through\nmediation and the report to this effect has been made part of the\nrecord, therefore, compelling the prosecution to prosecute the\npresent petitioner would be a futile exercise and in view of the\ndictum of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in re: B.S. Joshi\nand others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; 2003 (4) SCC\n675, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; State\nof Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149; State of\nMadhya Pradesh vs. Deepak (2014) 10 SCC 285; State of\nMadhya Pradesh vs. Manish (2015) 8 SCC 307; J.Ramesh\nKamath vs. Mohana Kurup (2016) 12 SCC 179; State of\nMadhya Pradesh vs. Rajveer Singh (2016) 12 SCC 471 and\nParbatbhai Ahir vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, the\nentire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case are hereby\nquashed.\n9. The mediation report dated 15.02.2024 submitted by the\nMediators would be the part of this order.\n10. If any of the conditions of the aforesaid settlement\nagreement is flouted, the other party will have liberty to file\nappropriate application before the competent court of law.\n11. The petition is, therefore, allowed.\nOrder Date :- 15.3.2024\nOm", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 2017, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "b8b15370-78a4-4076-8d60-32aa9bc1aa42": {"__data__": {"id_": "b8b15370-78a4-4076-8d60-32aa9bc1aa42", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "A482_11817_2023_of_BHEEM__SAHDEV_SHARMA_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11817_2023_of_BHEEM__SAHDEV_SHARMA_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 61577, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "72400f04-c063-4447-b916-350836333de5", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "A482_11817_2023_of_BHEEM__SAHDEV_SHARMA_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11817_2023_of_BHEEM__SAHDEV_SHARMA_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 61577, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "8f9dc4c790dab8ce49976f9db0a7852913f4a45fab93f04c144bbb596e570613", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:151665\nCourt No. - 86\nCase :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11817 of 2023\nApplicant :- Bheem @ Sahdev Sharma And 2 Others\nOpposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another\nCounsel for Applicant :- Ram Raj Pandey,Shubham \nPandey\nCounsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.\nHon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.\n1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA\nfor the State and perused the record. \n2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been\nfiled with the prayer to quash charge-sheet no.547 of\n2017 dated 12.10.2017 and cognizance/summoning order\ndated 30.10.2017 as well as entire proceedings of Case\nNo. 4891 of 2017 (State Vs. Bheem @ Sahdev Sharma\nand others), arising out of Case Crime No.793 of 2017,\nunder Sections 452, 323, 506, 354 and 354B IPC, Police\nStation Baghpat, District Baghpat.\n3. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that\nthe applicants and opposite party no.2 are family\nmembers and on account of dispute over raising of wall,\nthe instant criminal case was instituted against the\napplicants, however subsequently, with the intervention of\nrespected members of the family and society, the parties\nhave amicably and genuinely settled their all disputes and\ndifferences in order to maintain harmonious and cordial\nrelations between them and now, they do not have any\ngrievance against each other. \n4. Learned counsel for the applicants has next drawn the\nattention of this Court to the compromise deed dated\n12.12.2022 drawn between the parties, a copy of which\nhas been annexed as Annexure 6 to this application. \n5. This Court vide its order dated 06.04.2023 had directed\nthe parties to appear before the court below and file a\ncopy of the said compromise deed, which shall be verified\nby the court below and after verification of the\ncompromise, a report be submitted to this Court.\n6. Pursuant to the said order dated 06.04.2023, the", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1932, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "29c734a6-f188-4afe-b627-7fc11ce46cce": {"__data__": {"id_": "29c734a6-f188-4afe-b627-7fc11ce46cce", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "A482_11817_2023_of_BHEEM__SAHDEV_SHARMA_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11817_2023_of_BHEEM__SAHDEV_SHARMA_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 61577, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "fad0c086-3a60-4ee1-aaa0-bff51ad432af", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "A482_11817_2023_of_BHEEM__SAHDEV_SHARMA_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11817_2023_of_BHEEM__SAHDEV_SHARMA_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 61577, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "640fb9217fa00937c8d1fea1bcc8b71e3fa385933af64ad656dc73ce78ecccde", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "parties appeared before the court below and in their\npresence, after due verification of the contents of the\ncompromise made between the parties, an order dated\n01.06.2023 has been passed by the court below verifying\nthe said compromise. \n7. Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted\nthat in view of the said compromise and report of the court\nbelow and in order to maintain harmonious and cordial\nrelations between the parties, entire proceedings against\nthe applicants be quashed. \n8. Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid facts. \n9. This Court is not unmindful of the judgement of the\nHon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and\nothers Vs. State of Punjab, ( 2014) 6 SCC 466,\nParbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat\n(2017) 9 SCC, 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab\n(2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi\nNarayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein Hon'ble Apex\nCourt has categorically held that compromise can be\nmade between the parties even in respect of certain\ncognizable and non-compoundable offences. Reference\nmay also be made to the decision given by this Court in\nShaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and another\n[2013 (83) ACC 278] , in which, law expounded by the\nHon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been\nexplained in detail. \n10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,\nas noted herein above, and also the submissions made\nby learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the\nconsidered opinion that no useful purpose would be\nserved by prolonging the proceedings of the above\nmentioned case. \n11. Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No. 4891\nof 2017 (State Vs. Bheem @ Sahdev Sharma and\nothers), arising out of Case Crime No.793 of 2017, under\nSections 452, 323, 506, 354 and 354B IPC, Police Station\nBaghpat, District Baghpat, are hereby quashed.\n12. This application under Section 482 CrPC is\naccordingly allowed.\nOrder Date :- 28.7.2023\nSubham", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 2032, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "62bfd6c7-19f0-49c3-a9c5-a36477334954": {"__data__": {"id_": "62bfd6c7-19f0-49c3-a9c5-a36477334954", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "BAIL_40649_2023_of_SANDEEP_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40649_2023_of_SANDEEP_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 63879, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "da83f74e-c8e9-465e-a89c-e5a0e94fa522", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "BAIL_40649_2023_of_SANDEEP_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40649_2023_of_SANDEEP_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 63879, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "0ec0b9a7ba3de1e0728d413cee26b251e958acc20ee03657b34d4350a8fe6bd2", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:234359\nCourt No. - 85\nCase :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40649 of \n2023\nApplicant :- Sandeep\nOpposite Party :- State of U.P.\nCounsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Mishra\nCounsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.\nHon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.\nHeard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the\nState and learned counsel for the informant and perused the\nrecord. \nThe present second bail application has been filed on behalf of \napplicant in Case Crime No. 227 of 2022, under Section 498-A,\n304B of IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Gabhana,\nDistrict Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.\nFirst bail application of the applicant was rejected by this Court\nvide order dated 21.04.2023 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application\nNo.16532 of 2023.\nIt has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that\napplicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the\npresent case. It is submitted that after rejection of the first bail\napplication the cross examination of the PW-1 Narendra Singh\n(informant) was recorded in which he stated that his daughter\ncommitted suicide due to her low temperament behavior. PW-2\nUsha-the mother of the deceased during her statement also did not\ncorroborate the version of the prosecution and was declared\nhostile. It is submitted that evidence of Investigating Officer has\nalready been recorded. It is further submitted that applicant is\nlanguishing in jail since 04.07.2022 having no criminal history and\nthat in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of\nbail and will cooperate in trial. \nPer contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has\nopposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the\naforesaid aspect of the matter. \nIn Union of India Vs. K.A. Najeeb (2021) 3 SCC 713 , the\nHon'ble Apex Court has observed that:-", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1943, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "3f33d107-8f1b-4be2-b049-38aa4b513d8b": {"__data__": {"id_": "3f33d107-8f1b-4be2-b049-38aa4b513d8b", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "BAIL_40649_2023_of_SANDEEP_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40649_2023_of_SANDEEP_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 63879, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "36df2a3e-56d9-4add-9afd-0639687506f6", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "BAIL_40649_2023_of_SANDEEP_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40649_2023_of_SANDEEP_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 63879, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "beecbf7eff50272609bb733ee5b0a393392d7dd740109a1910417270f8a579ff", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "\"15. This Court has clarified in numerous judgments that the liberty\nguaranteed by Part III of the Constitution would cover within its protective\nambit not only due procedure and fairness but also access to justice and a\nspeedy trial. In Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee v. Union of India SCC\npara-15 it was held that undertrials cannot indefinitely be detained pending\ntrial. Ideally, no person ought to suffer adverse consequences of his acts\nunless the same is established before a neutral arbiter. However, owing to the\npracticalities of real life where to secure an effective trial and to ameliorate\nthe risk to society in case a potential criminal is left at large pending trial, the\nCourts are tasked with deciding whether an individual ought to be released\npending trial or not. Once it is obvious that a timely trial would not be\npossible and the accused has suffered incarceration for a significant period of\ntime, Courts would ordinarily be obligated to enlarge them on bail.\" \nConsidering the entire facts and circumstances of the case,\nsubmissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence\nand all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without\nexpressing any opinion on merits of the case, the Court is of the\nview that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail\napplication is allowed. \nLet the applicant Sandeep in the aforesaid crime be released on\nbail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like\namount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the\nfollowing conditions: \n(1). The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence\nduring the trial.\n(2). The applicant will not influence any witness. \n(3). The applicant will appear before the trial Court on the date\nfixed, unless personal presence is exempted. \n(4). The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any\ninducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the\nfacts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to\nthe Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. \nIn case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution\nshall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking\ncancellation of the bail. \nOrder Date :- 11.12.2023\nMohit", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 2303, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "7b48bc1e-27b9-4d87-8401-1e6131895758": {"__data__": {"id_": "7b48bc1e-27b9-4d87-8401-1e6131895758", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "BAIL_40650_2023_of_SHYAM_SUNDAR_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40650_2023_of_SHYAM_SUNDAR_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 50414, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "f53af524-7b0d-4f4a-b48c-51d4fa534441", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "BAIL_40650_2023_of_SHYAM_SUNDAR_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40650_2023_of_SHYAM_SUNDAR_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 50414, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "a4d065529e0ba38b141c4c974e1b0b11e0ac0c8a0fec2c26cc7032bb114a2bd5", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:215572\nCourt No. - 74\nCase :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40650 of 2023\nApplicant :- Shyam Sundar\nOpposite Party :- State of U.P.\nCounsel for Applicant :- Brij Bhushan Upadhyay\nCounsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.\nHon'ble Vivek Varma,J.\n1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Neeraj \nKumar Sharma, learned AGA for the State-respondent. \n2. The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has\nbeen filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case\nCrime No.286 of 2023, under Sections 395, 402, 412 IPC,\nPolice Station Meja, District Prayagraj, during the pendency of\ntrial.\n3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not\nnamed in the first information report. The applicant was\narrested on 11.07.2023 alongwith co-accused Aniket @ Zalim\nand Bachchi Lal Gaud and has been implicated in the instant\ncase. False recovery of Indian currency of Rs. 40,000/- and\nornaments made of gold and yellow metal has been shown from\nthe applicant. There is no independent witness to the alleged\nrecovery. It is next contended that identically placed co-accused\nBachchi Lal Gaud has been granted bail by this Court in\nCriminal Misc. Bail Application No. 40042 of 2023 vide order\ndated 21.09.2023. The applicant claims parity. The criminal\nhistory of the applicant has been explained in para 2 of the\nsupplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since\n12.07.2023 and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not\nmisuse the said liberty. \n4. Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not\nsatisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.\n5. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the\nrecord, this Court prima facie finds that the applicant was not\nnamed in the first information report. There is no independent\nwitness to the alleged recovery. At present there is no\nsubstantive evidence against the applicant. Identically placed\nco-accused Bachchi Lal Gaud has been granted bail by this\nCourt. Further, the applicant has remained confined for almost\nfour months and no reasonable apprehension has been brought\nto the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail,", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 2254, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "a098f33b-8896-4c91-a8ab-4ae7dbdaf04d": {"__data__": {"id_": "a098f33b-8896-4c91-a8ab-4ae7dbdaf04d", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "BAIL_40650_2023_of_SHYAM_SUNDAR_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40650_2023_of_SHYAM_SUNDAR_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 50414, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "ef8d4de0-3470-485b-b07a-b892e3ced115", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "BAIL_40650_2023_of_SHYAM_SUNDAR_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40650_2023_of_SHYAM_SUNDAR_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 50414, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "b7b5dd256be97da4a8b034bdfcd32987545546a8eb29110aa4c5585e44415e65", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or\nintimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the\ncase, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be\nenlarged on bail. \n6. Let the applicant Shyam Sundar, involved in the aforesaid\ncase be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and\ntwo sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the\ncourt concerned subject to the conditions that he: \n(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; \n(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and,\n(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.; \n7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the\nprosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation\napplication before this Court. \nOrder Date :- 8.11.2023\nLbm/-", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 814, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "b9f29a4a-6400-4e9f-87a8-d15b6fa912f5": {"__data__": {"id_": "b9f29a4a-6400-4e9f-87a8-d15b6fa912f5", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "BAIL_40655_2023_of_SALMAN_KHAN_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40655_2023_of_SALMAN_KHAN_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 50539, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "8d122c98-797f-4dbb-bd08-cdc255973bfd", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "BAIL_40655_2023_of_SALMAN_KHAN_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40655_2023_of_SALMAN_KHAN_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 50539, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "407883205c4b805d35be641d2e08872cb92d944423d60b76b314b43fceccc3ec", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:196798\nCourt No. - 74\nCase :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40655 of 2023\nApplicant :- Salman Khan\nOpposite Party :- State of U.P.\nCounsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Garg\nCounsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.\nHon'ble Vivek Varma,J.\n1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned\nA.G.A. for the State of U.P. and perused the record. \n2. The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been\nfiled with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime\nNo.0139 of 2022, under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters and Anti\nSocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Chilla,\nDistrict Banda, during the pendency of the trial. \n3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the\ngang chart, six cases are shown against the applicant and in the\nsaid cases the applicant has been enlarged on bail. \n4. He further submits that in the F.I.R., in issue, the allegations\nwith regard to disturbing the public order, as also regarding\ngaining undue temporal, pecuniary, material or other advantage of\nlike nature against the applicant are vague. In absence of allegation\nconcerning an act or omission on the part of an accused, covered\nby the definition of terms \"gang\" and \"gangster\" as provided under\nSection 2 of the Gangsters Act, no F.I.R. is maintainable. In the\ninstant case, the F.I.R. is based upon the pending criminal cases\nand not upon any new allegations or discovery of facts having\nserious reflection on the society, for which purpose the Gangsters\nAct was enacted. \n5. It is also submitted that considering the facts of the case, as\nstated above, there are reasonable grounds for believing that the\napplicant is not guilty of the offence under the Gangsters Act and\nthat he would not commit the offence while on bail nor would try\nto tamper the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner\nwhatsoever it may be. The applicant is in jail since 21.8.2022. \n6. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not\nsatisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 2120, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "d30edc4a-2d2d-4702-b82e-c4a6f0e620b2": {"__data__": {"id_": "d30edc4a-2d2d-4702-b82e-c4a6f0e620b2", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "BAIL_40655_2023_of_SALMAN_KHAN_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40655_2023_of_SALMAN_KHAN_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 50539, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "099879e6-8cc4-44fb-b291-f31f0141b1a3", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "BAIL_40655_2023_of_SALMAN_KHAN_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40655_2023_of_SALMAN_KHAN_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 50539, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "0ceadb4307d921a8cf561546af29022ff4a859cbdad365a21dc2ab9cd7e7cff7", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "7. Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties,\nmaterial available on record as well as taking note of Section 19(4)\n(b) of the Gangsters Act, in light of the submission of counsel for\nthe applicant to the effect that while on bail in this case, the\napplicant would not commit any crime/offence nor would try to\ntamper the evidence or influence the witnesses in any manner,\nwhatsoever it may be, and without expressing any opinion on the\nmerits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to\nbe released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. \n8. Let the applicant- Salman Khan, involved in the aforesaid case,\nbe released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two\nheavy sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court\nconcerned on the following conditions that: \n(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; \n(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;\nand, \n(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the\ntrial court. \n9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution\nshall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this\nCourt. \nOrder Date :- 12.10.2023\nS.S.", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1250, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "96663d27-7014-4c75-851a-b17bc83ab171": {"__data__": {"id_": "96663d27-7014-4c75-851a-b17bc83ab171", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WPIL_2691_2023_of_TRILOK_CHANDRA_SHARMA_AND_6_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_12_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WPIL_2691_2023_of_TRILOK_CHANDRA_SHARMA_AND_6_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_12_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 46381, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "7749bf43-2225-4416-9cc3-06d54bda2836", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WPIL_2691_2023_of_TRILOK_CHANDRA_SHARMA_AND_6_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_12_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WPIL_2691_2023_of_TRILOK_CHANDRA_SHARMA_AND_6_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_12_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 46381, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "1f7808c3385a6e9fc07b6aad84a1d6bcf1d47dcafc7a4112c31b24041aaed752", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:226993-DB\nCourt No. - 21\nCase :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2691 of \n2023\nPetitioner :- Trilok Chandra Sharma And 6 Others\nRespondent :- State Of U.P. And 12 Others\nCounsel for Petitioner :- Kuldeep Kumar\nCounsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.\nHon'ble Manoj Kumar Gupta,Acting Chief Justice\nHon'ble Donadi Ramesh,J.\n1. The petitioner states that he has filed the instant petition in\npublic interest, being a resident of District Bulandshahr. However,\ndisclosure of antecedents of the petitioner, as stipulated under\nChapter XXII Rule 1(3-A) of the Allahabad High Court Rules, has\nnot been made. \n2. Counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to withdraw the instant\npetition and to file a fresh petition, after complying with the\nprovisions of Chapter XXII Rule 1(3-A) of the Allahabad High\nCourt Rules. \n3. Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of as withdrawn,\nwith liberty in terms of the prayer made. \n(Donadi Ramesh, J.) (Manoj Kumar Gupta, A.C.J.) \nOrder Date :- 30.11.2023\nMukesh Pal", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1060, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "0b11914e-588d-4cc5-bf24-9fb738c80909": {"__data__": {"id_": "0b11914e-588d-4cc5-bf24-9fb738c80909", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WPIL_2693_2023_of_MATA_PRASAD_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WPIL_2693_2023_of_MATA_PRASAD_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 69808, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "47858b7d-a72a-4b6f-8817-861b30e0f1db", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WPIL_2693_2023_of_MATA_PRASAD_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WPIL_2693_2023_of_MATA_PRASAD_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 69808, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "681074e0e631fe6ddf8eccc1cde720df8c94aaf910cb546e3dd95af487169c7e", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:226139\nCourt No. - 47\nCase :- PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 2693 of 2023\nPetitioner :- Mata Prasad\nRespondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others\nCounsel for Petitioner :- Kanhaiya Lal Tiwari\nCounsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Pankaj Kumar Gupta\nHon'ble Manish Kumar Nigam,J.\n1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent and\nlearned Standing Counsel and perused the record.\n2. The present petition has been filed with the following prayer:\n\"I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and\ndirecting the respondent no. 2 and 3 to remove the illegal encroachment of\nrespondent no. 4 upon the Arazi No. 12 area 0.157 hectare situated at Village-\nMajhauwa Kunwar, Tappa-Puraina, Pargana-Amora, Tehsil-Harraiya, District-Basti\nrecorded as Khalihan, within stipulated period which this Hon'ble Court may deem\nfit and proper to the circumstances of the case.\"\n3. Learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that the petitioner\nhas an alternative remedy to approach appropriate authority by moving an\napplication under Section 67 of the Uttar Pradesh Revenue Code, 2006 in view of\nthe judgment passed by this Court in Jahar Singh v. State of U.P . reported in\n2017(4) ADJ 619 as well as in Public Interest Litigation No. 2117 of 2023\n(Kanhaiya Lal v. State of U.P. and 14 others .\n4. Since the petitioner has an alternative remedy, I am not inclined to entertain the\ninstant petition.\n5. In case, the petitioner moves an application under Section 67 of Uttar Pradesh\nRevenue Code, 2006, before appropriate authority, the same shall be decided after\nhearing all the concerned parties in accordance with law.\n6. With the aforesaid observation, the petition is disposed of. \nOrder Date :- 30.11.2023\nVed Prakash\n(Manish Kumar Nigam, J.)", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1863, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "8d3159a0-c07e-4cfd-87bd-6757383b7cae": {"__data__": {"id_": "8d3159a0-c07e-4cfd-87bd-6757383b7cae", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 70569, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "a5831121-c877-4d7f-98aa-55f6265e06fe", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 70569, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "bbc5ae586558196bfdf0374d0495b8592349e289d3d6bf7e5d47a8a0fe9daba7", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:5515\nCourt No. - 17\nCase :- WRIT - A No. - 348 of 2024\nPetitioner :- Premlata\nRespondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Nagar Vikas U.P. \nLko. And 2 Others\nCounsel for Petitioner :- Mahendra Nath Yadav\nCounsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Namit Sharma\nHon'ble Manish Mathur,J.\n1. Heard Mr. Mahendra Nath Yadav learned counsel for\npetitioner and State Counsel for opposite party No.1. Power on\nbehalf of opposite parties 2 and 3 have been accepted by Mr.\nVirendra Singh Advocate which is taken on record.\n2. Petition has been filed challenging order dated 18th\nNovember, 2023 whereby petitioner's application for\nappointment on compassionate basis under The U.P.\nRecruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in\nHarness Rules, 1974 has been rejected.\n3. Since reasons for rejection of petitioner's candidature has\nalready been indicated specifically in the impugned order itself,\nthere is no occasion for this Court to call for counter affidavit\nparticularly in matters such as compassionate appointment and\ntherefore this petition is being adjudicated upon at the\nadmission stage itself in terms of Judgment rendered by Hon'ble\nSupreme Court in the case of Mohinder Singh Gill versus Chief\nElection Commissioner, New Delhi and others reported in\nA.I.R. 1978 SC 851.\n4. It has been submitted that from a perusal of impugned order\nitself it will be indicated that petitioner's husband late Bal\nGovind was appointed on compassionate basis himself on 30th\nOctober, 2021 wherefter he was kept on probation for one year\nbut during that period he passed away in a road accident on\n24th November, 2021. It is submitted that since petitioner's late\nhusband was appointed on compassionate basis, as per settled\nlaw, his appointment would be deemed to be substantive in\nnature and not irregular as has been held in the impugned order.\nLearned counsel for petitioner has relied upon judgment\nrendered by Full bench of this Court in the case of Senior\nGeneral Manager Ordnance Factory versus Central\nAdministrative Tribunal and another passed in writ A No.43622\nof 2015 as well as in the case of Ravi Karan Singh versus State\nof U.P. and others (1999) (2) ESC 972.", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 2273, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "503515e8-2f5d-4a79-b3d8-fd28cea57074": {"__data__": {"id_": "503515e8-2f5d-4a79-b3d8-fd28cea57074", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 70569, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "82b2cdfc-1422-46ca-b604-e8c2a8c45c1c", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 70569, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "0b681749985a7143a5af04d792e59a057c46b5539189f9dfb2c454222e9b62a0", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties 2\nand 3 has refuted submissions advanced by learned counsel for\npetitioner on the premise that since petitioner's late husband had\nnot completed period of one year probation, it can not be said\nthat he was regular employee of the department due to which\npetitioner would not be covered in terms of Rule 2 of the Rules\nof 1974. It is also submitted that as has been indicated in the\nimpugned order, since petitioner's late husband did not fulfil the\nconditions of Rule 2 of the Rules 1974, no benefit can accrue to\npetitioner who is the wife of deceased.\n6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned\ncounsel for parties and perusal of material on record\nparticularly the impugned order, it is quite evident that\npetitioner's application for appointment on compassionate basis\nhas been rejected only on the ground that since petitioner's late\nhusband did not complete period of probation, he can not be\ndeemed to be a regular employee of the department and\ntherefore neither he nor the petitioner would come within\ndefinition of Rule 2 of Rules of 1974.\n7. The aforesaid proposition of law is no longer res integra and\nit has already been held that nature of compassionate\nappointment is substantive from the very first day of\nappointment as has been held in Full Bench decision in the case\nof Senior General Manager Ordnance Factory(supra) wherein\nquestion No.2 has specifically been answered that appointment\nof a person on compassionate ground can be made on probation\nbut is deemed to be a regular appointment and not temporary.\nThe same analogy has also been taken in the case of Ravi Karan\nSingh (supra). \n8. In view of settled law that appointment made on\ncompassionate basis under Rules of 1974 is regular in nature,\nthe very basis of impugned order is therefore in violation of\nsuch settled law. It is therefore held that petitioner' late husband\nwho admittedly was appointed on compassionate basis in terms\nof Rules of 1974 was a regular employee of the department due\nto which he as well as the petitioner would come within\ndefinition of Rule 2 of Rules of 1974. \n9. In view of aforesaid, the impugned order dated 18th\nNovember, 2023 is hereby quashed by issuance a writ in the\nnature of Certiorari since no other ground for rejection of\npetitioner's application has been taken, a further writ in the\nnature of Mandamus is issued commanding the opposite parties\n2 and 3 to offer appointment to petitioner on compassionate\nbasis within a peirod of six weeks from the date a certified copy\nof this order is produced before the said authority.", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 2713, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "58fdce07-6656-494e-943e-1fa9385345d0": {"__data__": {"id_": "58fdce07-6656-494e-943e-1fa9385345d0", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "3", "file_name": "WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 70569, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "b6450cba-8de8-4614-8fba-e930a2730322", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "3", "file_name": "WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 70569, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "b32aa3f48bf10166ff4d8dcb1e87ded1962e97bfa1fbd6a2d10e2a6c27a73d9d", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "10. Resultantly the petition succeeds and is allowed at the\nadmission stage itself. Parties to bear their own cost.\nOrder Date :- 19.1.2024\nprabhat", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 156, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "7889d77e-25ac-4b4a-a7d3-f5b8a04a5580": {"__data__": {"id_": "7889d77e-25ac-4b4a-a7d3-f5b8a04a5580", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WRIA_350_2024_of_BHUMIKA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_EDU_(MADHYAMIC)_LKO_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WRIA_350_2024_of_BHUMIKA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_EDU_(MADHYAMIC)_LKO_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 58253, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "b1db1dde-120b-4bff-a378-621341d36ea8", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WRIA_350_2024_of_BHUMIKA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_EDU_(MADHYAMIC)_LKO_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WRIA_350_2024_of_BHUMIKA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_EDU_(MADHYAMIC)_LKO_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 58253, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "db7c30bf0db7f7c0a356bbbb73e5d91c8919fa26f09418818b6ea00269bd900a", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:5556\nCourt No. - 20\nCase :- WRIT - A No. - 350 of 2024\nPetitioner :- Bhumika\nRespondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Edu. \n(Madhyamic) Lko And 4 Others\nCounsel for Petitioner :- Alok Singh\nCounsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.\nHon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J.\nThe counsel for the petitioner prays that the petition be\ndismissed as withdrawn with the liberty to file a fresh\npetition with better particulars.\nThe petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as\nprayed. \nOrder Date :- 19.1.2024\nIB", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 551, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "aad874e4-1463-4c1e-8572-6727529e1683": {"__data__": {"id_": "aad874e4-1463-4c1e-8572-6727529e1683", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "f6a93298-6a64-44a1-8810-670274c070af", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "189d83944a96436464eb672137e8687f8268bc64e34844f7392c7df6de4cfcdc", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Page No. 1 \nAFR\nReserved\nCourt No.6\nCase :- WRIT TAX No. - 1569 of 2022\nPetitioner :- M/S Lari Almira House\nRespondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others\nCounsel for Petitioner :- Aloke Kumar\nCounsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.\nAlong - With \nCase :- WRIT TAX No. - 1570 of 2022\nPetitioner :- M/S Lari Almira House\nRespondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others\nCounsel for Petitioner :- Aloke Kumar\nCounsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.\nHon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.\n1.Both the writ petitions are common in terms of the content and\nrelate to the same assessee although for different years, as such,\nthe same are being decided by means of this common order. For\nthe sake of brevity, the facts of Writ Tax No.1570 of 2022 are\nbeing referred to. \n2.Both the writ petitions have been filed challenging the order dated\n24.01.2022 passed in exercise of the power under Section 74 of\nthe U.P. G.S.T. Act against the petitioner as well as the order dated\n30.09.2022 passed by the first appellate authority whereby the\nappeal was dismissed as beyond limitation. \n3.The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the\nappellate authority has erred in dismissing the delay condonation\napplication, however he argues that in the event, this Court finds", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1237, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "b7e0c1cb-82fa-418e-a564-6ff920b66539": {"__data__": {"id_": "b7e0c1cb-82fa-418e-a564-6ff920b66539", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "44b473ae-0c3c-4754-99a8-cb909ba6c4d4", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "0575c9eaf90e8bd0ec5c235649e8096258cd7d16da9d72dc49e24effbae7920a", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Page No. 2 \nthat the appellate court had rightly dismissed the application for\nextension of period of limitation, this Court should hear the matter\nin respect of challenge to the order dated 24.01.2022 on the\ngrounds which are available for challenge of a quasi judicial order\nin exercise of the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of\nIndia, more so as the doctrine of merger would not apply as the\nappeal has been dismissed on the ground of limitation and not on\nmerits. \n4.On perusal of the appellate order (Annexure no.13), it is clear that\nthe same has been dismissed as being beyond limitation\nprescribed under Section 104 (4) of the U.P. G.S.T.Act.\n5.Considering the law which is clearly well settled by the Supreme\nCourt in the case of M.P . Steel Corporation vs. Commissioner of\nCentral Excise 2015(7) SCC 58, I do not find any error in the\nappellate order dated 30.09.2022, whereby the appeal was dismissed\non the ground of limitation. However, this Court is to consider the\nvalidity of the order dated 24.01.2022 on the limited grounds which\nare available for judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution\nof India as the order dated 24.01.2022 has not merged in the order\ndated 30.09.2022. \n6.The facts, in brief, are that the petitioner claims to be an assessee\nand holds a valid registration under the U.P. G.S.T. Act. It is\nclaimed that the petitioner had uploaded the relevant documents\nof sale and inward supply and had claimed input tax credit in\naccordance with law, however, for the financial year 2017-18, an\ninspection was carried out by the Deputy Commissioner (SIB),\nCommercial Tax, Gorakhpur on 20.04.2018 and a Panchanama\nwas prepared in pursuance to the inspection so carried out. The\ninspection report is on record as Annexure no.2 and 3.", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1813, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "ade67a84-1840-42bc-96fe-01fc81702575": {"__data__": {"id_": "ade67a84-1840-42bc-96fe-01fc81702575", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "3", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "7825878d-3ca5-493b-b8a7-740b2a611e2b", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "3", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "1aff56846143b38c1efe1385c4bbac4c5525ab978cbc81294b08c5cd6ad41b3d", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Page No. 3 \n7.It is argued that in terms of the said search and seizure, summons\nwere issued to the petitioner under section 70 of the Act on\n28.04.2018, the petitioner appeared in pursuance to the said\nsummons and also filed a reply. Subsequently, after about three\nyears on 02.09.2021, the petitioner was served with a show cause\nnotice under section 74 of the U.P.G.S.T. Act on the basis of the\nSIB survey report. The said show cause notice is on record as\nAnnexure no.8. Along with the said show cause notice, no relied\nupon documents were mentioned and the petitioner was not even\nsupplied with a copy of the SIB report. The petitioner asked for\nadjournment and was waiting for the supply of the SIB report,\nhowever, an ex-parte order came to be passed on 24.01.2022\nsolely based upon the said SIB report (Annexure no.9). \n8.The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the entire\nproceedings initiated against the petitioner on 02.09.20221 were\nbased upon the SIB report and without supplying a copy of the\nSIB report, the petitioner was not in a position to file a reply to the\nshow cause notice. He further argues that the order dated\n24.01.2022 is an ex-parte order solely based upon the SIB report\nand without there being any effort of the department to\ncorroborate the same by means of any evidence whatsoever. He\nfurther argues that even if for the sake of argument, it is accepted\nthat in the survey carried out by the SIB, there was some\ndiscrepancy in the recording of the materials, it is still incumbent\nupon the department to establish that the Tax was not paid on the\nsupplies effected by corroborating the same by means of some\nevidence either in the form of evidences by the purchaser of the\nsaid goods or otherwise.\n9.He draws my attention to argue that the G.S.T. is payable on\nsupply of goods in terms of Section 7 of the U.P. G.S.T. Act and", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1936, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "bf07cd36-b8d6-4570-825d-255a036b05d9": {"__data__": {"id_": "bf07cd36-b8d6-4570-825d-255a036b05d9", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "4", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "8e54a2b9-3ca7-430d-9078-cdb7634aeb4b", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "4", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "a820a4e2b38c9bb1d3ac10cce4ee5ceb411216f8aebc7e2c6eeeea5bca4a7b70", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Page No. 4 \nthe time of payment of the tax is governed by Section 12 and 13\nof the U.P. G.S.T. Act and the valuation of the supply of goods is\nto be done in terms of Section 15 of the U.P.G.S.T. Act, which\nadmittedly has not been done as is clear from the perusal of the\norder dated 24.01.2022. He argues that it is well settled that any\ndocument based upon which the order intended is to be passed\nshould be supplied to the assessee and any non-compliance\nthereof would render the order bad in law and also in violation of\nprinciple of natural justice. He lastly argues that improper returns\nonly give the right to the department to initiate the proceedings\nunder section 74 of the Act, in the light of section 61(3) of the\nU.P. G.S.T. Act. He also argues that in any event, no right of\nhearing was accorded to the petitioner which is a mandatory\nrequirement under section 75(4) of the U.P.G.S.T. Act. Specific\nallegation with regard to non-supply of the SIB report has been\nmade in paragraph 19, 36 and 38 of the Writ Petition. \n10.Standing counsel, on the other hand, justifies the order dated\n24.01.2022 by arguing that the SIB had found certain\ndiscrepancies in the search and seizure carried out at the premises\nof the petitioner and a copy of the search, seizure and panchnama\nare available with the petitioner. He further argues that in\npursuance to the search and seizure carried out by the SIB,\nsummons were also issued to the petitioner and the petitioner filed\na reply to the said summons and thereafter the SIB had forwarded\nits report.\n11.In reply to the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that the\nSIB report was not provided, it is stated in paragraph 28 of the\ncounter affidavit that the petitioner never demanded the copy of\nthe report and in any case, all important points mentioned in the\nreport were mention in the show cause notice itself. It is further", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1942, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "18fa934d-c57c-473d-b93d-c1fd612a9316": {"__data__": {"id_": "18fa934d-c57c-473d-b93d-c1fd612a9316", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "5", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "b1c4d1ab-ee95-417f-94ff-566fa3a43400", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "5", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "2b9ddc6f7e3f15e848c263e96c111204ba63e57f3d1db0e99b9016e8d999baf2", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Page No. 5 \npleaded in paragraph 43 of the counter affidavit that the report\nwas sent by the SIB on the basis of adverse facts found during the\ninvestigation by the SIB Unit and all important points in the SIB\nreport were mentioned in the show cause notice. \n12.With regard to the other contentions of the counsel for the\npetitioner, it has been especially stated in paragraph 42 of the\ncounter affidavit that as the stocks found by the SIB at the time of\nsurvey were verified by the petitioner and due to variation of the\nstocks from the books of account by the trader, the stock has been\ntreated as \u2018condemn purchase\u2019. It is further pleaded in paragraph\n44 of the counter affidavit that the assessment of duty was done,\non the basis of unverified records and stock by the SIB Unit,\nwhich has prepared the report on the basis of the verification and\nnot on the basis of eye estimation and thus, on the said\nfoundation, the demand has been created as per the Rules. \n13.It is also pleaded that the petitioner was provided with several\nreasonable opportunities for hearing but no explanation was\nsubmitted, as such, an ex-parte order was passed. \n14.In the light of the pleadings as referred above, what emerges is\nthat an ex-parte order came to be passed against the petitioner on\n24.01.2022, the foundation for passing the said order is the SIB\nreport alone. No opportunity of hearing appears to have been\ngranted to the petitioner nor is the same mentioned in the order\ndated 24.01.2022. \n15.In terms of the scheme of the Act, the power of search and seizure\nis conferred by virtue of Section 67 of the Act and the power of\nscrutiny of returns filed is conferred upon the proper officer in\nterms of Section 61 of the Act. Both the said sections 61 and 67,\nare step towards the initiation of the proceedings either under", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1856, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "654b1fac-d43a-42ea-a732-9224abb890fe": {"__data__": {"id_": "654b1fac-d43a-42ea-a732-9224abb890fe", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "6", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "f12d38f1-3376-4d50-af4d-2a6d5618d68b", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "6", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "a4c66a9523394e11d40aff0ef84974aa3eda1c491e4a8bb4ecd3b6d637e74f98", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Page No. 6 \nSection 73 or Section 74 of the Act, as the case may be. They in\nitself do not form any basis for concluding the evasion of tax,\nwhich has to be established by following the procedure as\nprescribed under section 73 and under section 74 of the Act as the\ncase may be. Section 74 from its plain reading confers the power\nto assess the non-payment of tax on the supply or wrong\navailment of input tax credit by the reasons of fraud, wilful\nmisstatement or suppression of facts coupled with an intent to\nevade tax. Irrespective of the outcome of the scrutiny of return\nunder section 61 of the Act or the inspection carried out under\nsection 67 of the Act, the burden of assessing the short payment of\ntax or wrong availment of input tax credit still lies on the\ndepartment which is to be discharged by the department. \n16.To calculate and assess the non-payment of tax, it is essential that\nthe relevant evidence is carried out by the department in respect of\nthe taxable supplies made by the assessee and non-payment of tax\nwhich is required to be done at the time of supply as specified\nunder section 13 of the Act. It is also incumbent on the\ndepartment to compute the value of taxable supply on the goods\non which it is alleged that the tax has either not been paid or short\npaid or short levied. In addition to the said, the burden is on the\ndepartment to establish that the said non-payment was on account\nof fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts. Mere report\nof inspection and discrepancy in the scrutiny of returns is not\nenough to assess and levy the tax, the said discrepancies, even if\nnoticed by the department should be corroborated with materials\nin the form of either the evidence or in any other form as the\ndepartment may deem fit. Without any corroborative material,\nmerely on the basis of discrepancies found in the scrutiny of", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1937, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "5388d0e0-4b02-4858-8119-e3eba707aa43": {"__data__": {"id_": "5388d0e0-4b02-4858-8119-e3eba707aa43", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "7", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "59518a08-cd2b-435f-acbc-7b6457d74ae3", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "7", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "31d434317440aee15e3383241d0a73768e0d28178f062472bcb1d6ff55784017", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Page No. 7 \nreturns or discrepancies found during the inspection is not enough\nto assess the tax. \n17.It is also incumbent upon the department to give the opportunity\nof hearing as per the Section 75(4) of the Act which is mandatory\nto be followed by the department. It is equally well settled that\nany document proposed to be relied upon should be provided to\nthe assessee prior to conclusion of the proceedings.\n18.In the present case, the order dated 24.01.2022, clearly falls short\nof the principle of natural of justice as admittedly the SIB report,\nwhich is the foundation was never supplied to the petitioner, no\nhearing was granted to the petitioner under section 75(4) of the\nAct and there is prima facie no material other than the SIB report\nto corroborate the discrepancies as allegedly found by the SIB at\nthe time of scrutiny of returns and inspection. \n19.Thus, on all the three grounds, as noted above, the impugned\norder dated 24.01.2022 is unsustainable and is quashed. The\nmatter is remanded to the adjudicating authority to pass a fresh\norder after supplying the copy of the SIB report and giving an\nopportunity of hearing to the petitioner and also an opportunity of\nfiling a reply. \n20.Both the writ petitions stand allowed in terms of the said order.\nOrder Date :- April 12, 2023\nVNP/-\n[ Pankaj Bhatia, J ]", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1339, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "d89cb0c1-8acc-4720-a0b9-b56335fe874a": {"__data__": {"id_": "d89cb0c1-8acc-4720-a0b9-b56335fe874a", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 48436, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "f7863818-a442-40a9-92f6-7b364366f2db", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 48436, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "3fcf27a113770382bf2362452f3a378f7ccdf736210d706589164a6002bdf570", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD \n***\n \n \n \nORDER \n \n1.\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 Recovery citation dated November 7, 2022 issued against the \npetitioner, on account of motor vehicle tax, is under challenge in the \npresent petition.\n2.\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 The argument raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is \nthat the petitioner had purchased a Tata Ace Magic vehicle bearing \nregistration No.UP 62T 8337 on January 24, 2013. \u00a0The petitioner \nborrowed loan\u00a0 from TATA Motors Finance Limited (respondent no.5). \nThe vehicle was hypothecated with TATA Motors Finance Limited. The \npetitioner regularly paid installments of the loan. Thereafter, due to loss \nin travelling business, he failed to pay further installments. On\u00a0 August \n25, 2014, the petitioner surrendered the vehicle before respondent no.5 . \nThereafter, the vehicle was sold by the Finance Company to some other \nperson. After possession of the vehicle was taken by the financer, the \nliability of the tax cannot be put on the petitioner as in that case the \nfinancer or the subsequent purchaser will be liable to pay the tax. In \nsupport of the argument reliance has been placed upon judgment of \nHon'ble the Supreme Court in Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Chief Justice's Court \nSerial No. 18\nWRIT TAX No. - 1573 of 2022 \nThrough :- Mr. Rajesh Kumar Shukla, Advocate\nv/s\nThrough :- Mr. Neeraj Kumar Singh, State Law Officer for \nrespondent nos. 1 to 4 \nMr. Ramesh Kumar Shukla, Advocate for \nrespondent no. 5\nCORAM : HON'BLE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE\nHON'BLE OM PRAKASH TRIPATHI, JUDGEVikas Upadhyay .....Petitioner\nState of U.P. and others .....Respondents", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 8, "end_char_idx": 1631, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "c1529cad-0b76-4010-98a5-c0b56f137861": {"__data__": {"id_": "c1529cad-0b76-4010-98a5-c0b56f137861", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 48436, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "a963156b-4777-4ba5-bd07-859754afc2bc", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 48436, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "545d2398afc9d11b197246c52c748295f18e20a7edfd96ed5cbd76e7bc50027e", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "Services Ltd. vs. State of U.P. and others, (2022) 5 SCC 525 .\n3.\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Learned counsel for the State submitted that in terms of Rule \n18 of the U.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules, 1998 (hereinafter referred \nto as 'the Rules'), the petitioner was required to inform the Taxation \nOfficer about the fact that the possession of the vehicle in question was \ntaken by the financer, so as to enable the authority to fasten liability on \nthe financer. As the petitioner has failed to do so, demand was raised \nagainst him. However, in case, he points out the details to the Taxation \nOfficer, the issue will be examined in the light of judgment of Hon'ble \nthe Supreme Court in Mahindra and Mahindra Financial Services' \ncase (supra) .\n4.\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we find merit \nin the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner as he stated \nthat vehicle in question was surrendered to the financer in August 2014 \nand in view of the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in\u00a0 Mahindra \nand Mahindra Financial Services' case (supra) ,\u00a0the liability for \npayment of tax thereafter cannot be fastened on the petitioner. Relevant \nparagraph 12 of the aforesaid judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:\n\"In view of the above discussion and for the reasons stated \nabove, it is held that a financier of a motor vehicle/transport \nvehicle in respect of which a hire-purchase or lease or \nhypothecation agreement has been entered, is liable to tax \nfrom the date of taking possession of the said vehicle under \nthe said agreement. If, after the payment of tax, the vehicle is \nnot used for a month or more, then such an owner may apply \nfor refund under Section 12 of the Act, 1997 and has to \ncomply with all the requirements for seeking the refund as \nmentioned in Section 12, and on fulfilling and/or complying \nwith all the conditions mentioned in Section 12(1), he may get \nthe refund to the extent provided in sub-section(1) of Section \n12, as even under Section 12(1), the owner/operator shall not \nbe entitled to the full refund but shall be entitled to the refund \nof an amount equal to one-third of the rate of quarterly tax or \none twelfth of the yearly tax, as the case may be, payable in 2 WTAX No. 1573 of 2022", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 2293, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}, "516d4b01-677c-4c59-b553-869701288198": {"__data__": {"id_": "516d4b01-677c-4c59-b553-869701288198", "embedding": null, "metadata": {"page_label": "3", "file_name": "WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 48436, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "excluded_embed_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "excluded_llm_metadata_keys": ["file_name", "file_type", "file_size", "creation_date", "last_modified_date", "last_accessed_date"], "relationships": {"1": {"node_id": "3cac872f-8557-4fad-a771-24d699fff2f7", "node_type": "4", "metadata": {"page_label": "3", "file_name": "WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 48436, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}, "hash": "3356a4e76ecdcec676e30513ce752d7561556d7387cb89cd35c4c4fdadd81555", "class_name": "RelatedNodeInfo"}}, "text": "respect of such vehicle for each thirty days of such period for \nwhich such tax has been paid. However, only in a case, which \nfalls under sub-section(2) of Section 12 and subject to \nsurrender of the necessary documents as mentioned in sub-\nsection(2) of Section 12, the liability to pay the tax shall not \narise, otherwise the liability to pay the tax by such \nowner/operator shall continue.\"\n(emphasis supplied)\n5.\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0In view of aforesaid, the petitioner may file objection against \nthe recovery citation dated November 7, 2022\u00a0 \u00a0in\u00a0terms of Rule 18 of the \nRules, mentioning that possession of the vehicle in question was taken \nby the financer in August 2014. In case, the petitioner files objection, the \nsame be considered by the competent authority and from the date of \npossession of the vehicle was taken by the financer, the liability may be \nre-worked out in terms of judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in\u00a0\nMahindra and Mahindra Financial Services' case (supra) . However, \nfor any period prior to that, if the tax has not been paid, the petitioner \nshall be liable to pay the same.\n6.\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of and recovery \ncitation dated November 7, 2022 issued against the petitioner is quashed.\nAllahabad\n03.02.2023\nManish Himwan/A.Mandhani\nWhether the order is speaking : Yes\nWhether the order is reportable : Yes/No3 WTAX No. 1573 of 2022\n(Om Prakash Tripathi)\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \nJudge\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0(Rajesh Bindal) \nChief Justice", "mimetype": "text/plain", "start_char_idx": 0, "end_char_idx": 1505, "text_template": "{metadata_str}\n\n{content}", "metadata_template": "{key}: {value}", "metadata_seperator": "\n"}, "__type__": "1"}}, "docstore/metadata": {"ef969ad2-9b55-423f-abd4-dd92fda2a7e0": {"doc_hash": "0cdd8a7bd91f77e85c16d1f6efb138efa1df5158b748bcfe02a1a500fd9a6f7c", "ref_doc_id": "7d539f8a-7c35-4001-aebb-277e01aed3c1"}, "f98a0ef1-8908-4f70-b8f5-543334b08cbf": {"doc_hash": "c988905b5e1104062809989ebd192527680241e5c91e8583cc05523ff5b3b88a", "ref_doc_id": "df8fd8f1-4b86-49b0-a465-9957363e4bd2"}, "237bc72a-2fca-44ad-95d1-9ecb49182fc9": {"doc_hash": "8cb7e477572ce2b261a9aed6869faf02af666b6c630cd4d299e51fa9ff38518c", "ref_doc_id": "6d6886dd-40b7-4b84-ba68-d233d44b7962"}, "46ad205c-cb33-4cee-8687-532104ab1a9f": {"doc_hash": "ffc930d6046b1851cf4660edf3bcaa9d81463b196b2e84b17e4b8ba3d80576d3", "ref_doc_id": "57670fde-4e05-4f8a-9f39-17edb90067cd"}, "4bd4936c-549c-44be-83cd-8008ee4d9b33": {"doc_hash": "1d238bd425b5ca03392b4cf0c29eb8e05c3be7650895a7c73cfb14965f628fb0", "ref_doc_id": "28ded781-337a-42bd-b334-06613bbc8ce5"}, "85359605-7e8a-4283-941a-d7f522a551f5": {"doc_hash": "3d5bfa02e10e96a55804e579c06edb3bac6ca7caa5a97972c7b10a5a42502103", "ref_doc_id": "210b2648-a0a5-49db-a8d2-869857a5e36f"}, "a9343030-12b2-4f1a-9bd6-cfe85b10ca22": {"doc_hash": "66c892ee1e2ea4417c9c763f9f38d63b270808791221d6a2c05acd982b92bdf6", "ref_doc_id": "a2e1691d-8440-4414-b1d2-c1f1dd1b9a24"}, "b8b15370-78a4-4076-8d60-32aa9bc1aa42": {"doc_hash": "8f9dc4c790dab8ce49976f9db0a7852913f4a45fab93f04c144bbb596e570613", "ref_doc_id": "72400f04-c063-4447-b916-350836333de5"}, "29c734a6-f188-4afe-b627-7fc11ce46cce": {"doc_hash": "640fb9217fa00937c8d1fea1bcc8b71e3fa385933af64ad656dc73ce78ecccde", "ref_doc_id": "fad0c086-3a60-4ee1-aaa0-bff51ad432af"}, "62bfd6c7-19f0-49c3-a9c5-a36477334954": {"doc_hash": "aa442a1140d84e8bc430dab566471c6994b86ea49d95d9f2259ee9e6026ef499", "ref_doc_id": "da83f74e-c8e9-465e-a89c-e5a0e94fa522"}, "3f33d107-8f1b-4be2-b049-38aa4b513d8b": {"doc_hash": "beecbf7eff50272609bb733ee5b0a393392d7dd740109a1910417270f8a579ff", "ref_doc_id": "36df2a3e-56d9-4add-9afd-0639687506f6"}, "7b48bc1e-27b9-4d87-8401-1e6131895758": {"doc_hash": "a4d065529e0ba38b141c4c974e1b0b11e0ac0c8a0fec2c26cc7032bb114a2bd5", "ref_doc_id": "f53af524-7b0d-4f4a-b48c-51d4fa534441"}, "a098f33b-8896-4c91-a8ab-4ae7dbdaf04d": {"doc_hash": "b7b5dd256be97da4a8b034bdfcd32987545546a8eb29110aa4c5585e44415e65", "ref_doc_id": "ef8d4de0-3470-485b-b07a-b892e3ced115"}, "b9f29a4a-6400-4e9f-87a8-d15b6fa912f5": {"doc_hash": "3dde041d885548491ab8495c56bb8bb3268f6492987edaa88a0024c98ec6d616", "ref_doc_id": "8d122c98-797f-4dbb-bd08-cdc255973bfd"}, "d30edc4a-2d2d-4702-b82e-c4a6f0e620b2": {"doc_hash": "0ceadb4307d921a8cf561546af29022ff4a859cbdad365a21dc2ab9cd7e7cff7", "ref_doc_id": "099879e6-8cc4-44fb-b291-f31f0141b1a3"}, "96663d27-7014-4c75-851a-b17bc83ab171": {"doc_hash": "1f7808c3385a6e9fc07b6aad84a1d6bcf1d47dcafc7a4112c31b24041aaed752", "ref_doc_id": "7749bf43-2225-4416-9cc3-06d54bda2836"}, "0b11914e-588d-4cc5-bf24-9fb738c80909": {"doc_hash": "e54d78f9546562a66d8b6018a999394311455ef07a5d54a2629fcd5e35d21be3", "ref_doc_id": "47858b7d-a72a-4b6f-8817-861b30e0f1db"}, "8d3159a0-c07e-4cfd-87bd-6757383b7cae": {"doc_hash": "9ecb58d817f10d666be418361e6b0873457ddafbe03417ac0376e35d3a07f882", "ref_doc_id": "a5831121-c877-4d7f-98aa-55f6265e06fe"}, "503515e8-2f5d-4a79-b3d8-fd28cea57074": {"doc_hash": "0b681749985a7143a5af04d792e59a057c46b5539189f9dfb2c454222e9b62a0", "ref_doc_id": "82b2cdfc-1422-46ca-b604-e8c2a8c45c1c"}, "58fdce07-6656-494e-943e-1fa9385345d0": {"doc_hash": "b32aa3f48bf10166ff4d8dcb1e87ded1962e97bfa1fbd6a2d10e2a6c27a73d9d", "ref_doc_id": "b6450cba-8de8-4614-8fba-e930a2730322"}, "7889d77e-25ac-4b4a-a7d3-f5b8a04a5580": {"doc_hash": "db7c30bf0db7f7c0a356bbbb73e5d91c8919fa26f09418818b6ea00269bd900a", "ref_doc_id": "b1db1dde-120b-4bff-a378-621341d36ea8"}, "aad874e4-1463-4c1e-8572-6727529e1683": {"doc_hash": "189d83944a96436464eb672137e8687f8268bc64e34844f7392c7df6de4cfcdc", "ref_doc_id": "f6a93298-6a64-44a1-8810-670274c070af"}, "b7e0c1cb-82fa-418e-a564-6ff920b66539": {"doc_hash": "0575c9eaf90e8bd0ec5c235649e8096258cd7d16da9d72dc49e24effbae7920a", "ref_doc_id": "44b473ae-0c3c-4754-99a8-cb909ba6c4d4"}, "ade67a84-1840-42bc-96fe-01fc81702575": {"doc_hash": "1aff56846143b38c1efe1385c4bbac4c5525ab978cbc81294b08c5cd6ad41b3d", "ref_doc_id": "7825878d-3ca5-493b-b8a7-740b2a611e2b"}, "bf07cd36-b8d6-4570-825d-255a036b05d9": {"doc_hash": "a820a4e2b38c9bb1d3ac10cce4ee5ceb411216f8aebc7e2c6eeeea5bca4a7b70", "ref_doc_id": "8e54a2b9-3ca7-430d-9078-cdb7634aeb4b"}, "18fa934d-c57c-473d-b93d-c1fd612a9316": {"doc_hash": "2b9ddc6f7e3f15e848c263e96c111204ba63e57f3d1db0e99b9016e8d999baf2", "ref_doc_id": "b1c4d1ab-ee95-417f-94ff-566fa3a43400"}, "654b1fac-d43a-42ea-a732-9224abb890fe": {"doc_hash": "a4c66a9523394e11d40aff0ef84974aa3eda1c491e4a8bb4ecd3b6d637e74f98", "ref_doc_id": "f12d38f1-3376-4d50-af4d-2a6d5618d68b"}, "5388d0e0-4b02-4858-8119-e3eba707aa43": {"doc_hash": "31d434317440aee15e3383241d0a73768e0d28178f062472bcb1d6ff55784017", "ref_doc_id": "59518a08-cd2b-435f-acbc-7b6457d74ae3"}, "d89cb0c1-8acc-4720-a0b9-b56335fe874a": {"doc_hash": "916d6429a379df79524ee3f53752f25b480d745dd2ee6a1644fac3c292006ec1", "ref_doc_id": "f7863818-a442-40a9-92f6-7b364366f2db"}, "c1529cad-0b76-4010-98a5-c0b56f137861": {"doc_hash": "545d2398afc9d11b197246c52c748295f18e20a7edfd96ed5cbd76e7bc50027e", "ref_doc_id": "a963156b-4777-4ba5-bd07-859754afc2bc"}, "516d4b01-677c-4c59-b553-869701288198": {"doc_hash": "3356a4e76ecdcec676e30513ce752d7561556d7387cb89cd35c4c4fdadd81555", "ref_doc_id": "3cac872f-8557-4fad-a771-24d699fff2f7"}}, "docstore/ref_doc_info": {"7d539f8a-7c35-4001-aebb-277e01aed3c1": {"node_ids": ["ef969ad2-9b55-423f-abd4-dd92fda2a7e0"], "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "A482_11776_2023_of_AAFAK__MANJAR_AND_3_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11776_2023_of_AAFAK__MANJAR_AND_3_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 88942, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "df8fd8f1-4b86-49b0-a465-9957363e4bd2": {"node_ids": ["f98a0ef1-8908-4f70-b8f5-543334b08cbf"], "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "A482_11776_2023_of_AAFAK__MANJAR_AND_3_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11776_2023_of_AAFAK__MANJAR_AND_3_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 88942, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "6d6886dd-40b7-4b84-ba68-d233d44b7962": {"node_ids": ["237bc72a-2fca-44ad-95d1-9ecb49182fc9"], "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 54450, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "57670fde-4e05-4f8a-9f39-17edb90067cd": {"node_ids": ["46ad205c-cb33-4cee-8687-532104ab1a9f"], "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 54450, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "28ded781-337a-42bd-b334-06613bbc8ce5": {"node_ids": ["4bd4936c-549c-44be-83cd-8008ee4d9b33"], "metadata": {"page_label": "3", "file_name": "A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11793_2023_of_ROHIT_VISHWAKARMA_AND_ANOTHER_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_HOME_LKO_AND_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 54450, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "210b2648-a0a5-49db-a8d2-869857a5e36f": {"node_ids": ["85359605-7e8a-4283-941a-d7f522a551f5"], "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "A482_11805_2023_of_BABLU__JUNED_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_HOME_DEPTT_LKO_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11805_2023_of_BABLU__JUNED_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_HOME_DEPTT_LKO_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 115548, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "a2e1691d-8440-4414-b1d2-c1f1dd1b9a24": {"node_ids": ["a9343030-12b2-4f1a-9bd6-cfe85b10ca22"], "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "A482_11805_2023_of_BABLU__JUNED_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_HOME_DEPTT_LKO_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11805_2023_of_BABLU__JUNED_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_HOME_DEPTT_LKO_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 115548, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "72400f04-c063-4447-b916-350836333de5": {"node_ids": ["b8b15370-78a4-4076-8d60-32aa9bc1aa42"], "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "A482_11817_2023_of_BHEEM__SAHDEV_SHARMA_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11817_2023_of_BHEEM__SAHDEV_SHARMA_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 61577, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "fad0c086-3a60-4ee1-aaa0-bff51ad432af": {"node_ids": ["29c734a6-f188-4afe-b627-7fc11ce46cce"], "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "A482_11817_2023_of_BHEEM__SAHDEV_SHARMA_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/A482_11817_2023_of_BHEEM__SAHDEV_SHARMA_AND_2_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_ANOTHER.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 61577, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "da83f74e-c8e9-465e-a89c-e5a0e94fa522": {"node_ids": ["62bfd6c7-19f0-49c3-a9c5-a36477334954"], "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "BAIL_40649_2023_of_SANDEEP_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40649_2023_of_SANDEEP_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 63879, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "36df2a3e-56d9-4add-9afd-0639687506f6": {"node_ids": ["3f33d107-8f1b-4be2-b049-38aa4b513d8b"], "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "BAIL_40649_2023_of_SANDEEP_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40649_2023_of_SANDEEP_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 63879, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "f53af524-7b0d-4f4a-b48c-51d4fa534441": {"node_ids": ["7b48bc1e-27b9-4d87-8401-1e6131895758"], "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "BAIL_40650_2023_of_SHYAM_SUNDAR_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40650_2023_of_SHYAM_SUNDAR_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 50414, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "ef8d4de0-3470-485b-b07a-b892e3ced115": {"node_ids": ["a098f33b-8896-4c91-a8ab-4ae7dbdaf04d"], "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "BAIL_40650_2023_of_SHYAM_SUNDAR_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40650_2023_of_SHYAM_SUNDAR_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 50414, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "8d122c98-797f-4dbb-bd08-cdc255973bfd": {"node_ids": ["b9f29a4a-6400-4e9f-87a8-d15b6fa912f5"], "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "BAIL_40655_2023_of_SALMAN_KHAN_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40655_2023_of_SALMAN_KHAN_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 50539, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "099879e6-8cc4-44fb-b291-f31f0141b1a3": {"node_ids": ["d30edc4a-2d2d-4702-b82e-c4a6f0e620b2"], "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "BAIL_40655_2023_of_SALMAN_KHAN_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/BAIL_40655_2023_of_SALMAN_KHAN_Vs_STATE_OF_UP.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 50539, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "7749bf43-2225-4416-9cc3-06d54bda2836": {"node_ids": ["96663d27-7014-4c75-851a-b17bc83ab171"], "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WPIL_2691_2023_of_TRILOK_CHANDRA_SHARMA_AND_6_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_12_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WPIL_2691_2023_of_TRILOK_CHANDRA_SHARMA_AND_6_OTHERS_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_12_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 46381, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "47858b7d-a72a-4b6f-8817-861b30e0f1db": {"node_ids": ["0b11914e-588d-4cc5-bf24-9fb738c80909"], "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WPIL_2693_2023_of_MATA_PRASAD_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WPIL_2693_2023_of_MATA_PRASAD_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 69808, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "a5831121-c877-4d7f-98aa-55f6265e06fe": {"node_ids": ["8d3159a0-c07e-4cfd-87bd-6757383b7cae"], "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 70569, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "82b2cdfc-1422-46ca-b604-e8c2a8c45c1c": {"node_ids": ["503515e8-2f5d-4a79-b3d8-fd28cea57074"], "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 70569, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "b6450cba-8de8-4614-8fba-e930a2730322": {"node_ids": ["58fdce07-6656-494e-943e-1fa9385345d0"], "metadata": {"page_label": "3", "file_name": "WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WRIA_348_2024_of_PREMLATA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_PRIN_SECY_DEPTT_OF_NAGAR_VIKAS_UP_LKO_AND_2_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 70569, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "b1db1dde-120b-4bff-a378-621341d36ea8": {"node_ids": ["7889d77e-25ac-4b4a-a7d3-f5b8a04a5580"], "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WRIA_350_2024_of_BHUMIKA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_EDU_(MADHYAMIC)_LKO_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WRIA_350_2024_of_BHUMIKA_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_THRU_ADDL_CHIEF_SECY_DEPTT_EDU_(MADHYAMIC)_LKO_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 58253, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "f6a93298-6a64-44a1-8810-670274c070af": {"node_ids": ["aad874e4-1463-4c1e-8572-6727529e1683"], "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "44b473ae-0c3c-4754-99a8-cb909ba6c4d4": {"node_ids": ["b7e0c1cb-82fa-418e-a564-6ff920b66539"], "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "7825878d-3ca5-493b-b8a7-740b2a611e2b": {"node_ids": ["ade67a84-1840-42bc-96fe-01fc81702575"], "metadata": {"page_label": "3", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "8e54a2b9-3ca7-430d-9078-cdb7634aeb4b": {"node_ids": ["bf07cd36-b8d6-4570-825d-255a036b05d9"], "metadata": {"page_label": "4", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "b1c4d1ab-ee95-417f-94ff-566fa3a43400": {"node_ids": ["18fa934d-c57c-473d-b93d-c1fd612a9316"], "metadata": {"page_label": "5", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "f12d38f1-3376-4d50-af4d-2a6d5618d68b": {"node_ids": ["654b1fac-d43a-42ea-a732-9224abb890fe"], "metadata": {"page_label": "6", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "59518a08-cd2b-435f-acbc-7b6457d74ae3": {"node_ids": ["5388d0e0-4b02-4858-8119-e3eba707aa43"], "metadata": {"page_label": "7", "file_name": "WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1569_2022_of_M_S_LARI_ALMIRA_HOUSE_Vs_State_of_UP_AND_3_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 124711, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "f7863818-a442-40a9-92f6-7b364366f2db": {"node_ids": ["d89cb0c1-8acc-4720-a0b9-b56335fe874a"], "metadata": {"page_label": "1", "file_name": "WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 48436, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "a963156b-4777-4ba5-bd07-859754afc2bc": {"node_ids": ["c1529cad-0b76-4010-98a5-c0b56f137861"], "metadata": {"page_label": "2", "file_name": "WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 48436, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}, "3cac872f-8557-4fad-a771-24d699fff2f7": {"node_ids": ["516d4b01-677c-4c59-b553-869701288198"], "metadata": {"page_label": "3", "file_name": "WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_path": "/kaggle/input/legal-docs/WTAX_1573_2022_of_VIKAS_UPADHYAY_Vs_STATE_OF_UP_AND_4_OTHERS.pdf", "file_type": "application/pdf", "file_size": 48436, "creation_date": "2024-08-07", "last_modified_date": "2024-08-07"}}}} \ No newline at end of file