Himachal Pradesh Court October 1950 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Choudhary Vs. Devi Ram and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-26-1950
Reported in: AIR1951HP25
ORDERChowdhry, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 438, Criminal P. C. by the District Magistrate of Mahasu recommending that this Court, in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction, should set aside the order of a first class Magistrate of Solan acquitting the accused Devi Bam of cm offence punishable under Section 498, Penal Code, and order his retrial.2. A complaint was filed by one Chaudhari on 18-9-1948 that about 6 years ago the accused had enticed away the complainant's legally wedded wife Mt. Dilgiro, knowing her to foe the complainant's wife, and that he had been detaining her and having illicit intercourse with her. The accused admitted Mt. Dilgiro being the complainant's wife but he denied that he had enticed her, or had been detaining her, or that he had illicit intercourse with her. He stated that she was his wife's cousin and had come to his house in hia absence, and had been living there, of her own accord. He also stated that when she came to his house he had a repor...
The State Vs. Kali
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-16-1950
Reported in: AIR1951HP28
Chowdhry, J. 1. This is a Government appeal against the acquittal of the respondent Kali of a charge under Section 9 (c), Opium Act, by a learned Magistrate of Nahan.2. One maund and twenty-nine seers of opium was discovered from a hillock about four furlong a from the respondent's house on being pointed out by him. The prosecution case is that the discovery was preceded by a statement made by the respondent to the police that he along with others had concealed the opium there. The defence was that the opium had not been concealed by the respondent but by others, and that the respondent had detected those others concealing the opium and informed the police about it.3. The respondent produced no evidence in support of his version, but the learned Magistrate found himself precluded from finding him guilty by two rulings of the Allahabad and Lahore High Courts reported as Baldeo v. Emperor, A. I. R. (27) 1940 ALL. 263 : (41 or. L. J. 627 F. B.) and Hakamkhudayar v. Emperor, A. I. R, (27) ...
indar Dass Vs. State
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-05-1950
Reported in: AIR1951HP31
ORDERChowdhry, J. 1. This is an application for bail by one Indar Dass who is said to have been arrested on 28-9-50 at a village within P. S. Kumarsain, and who is now under detention in P. S. Theog. The offence alleged against him is one under Section 409, Penal Code.2. A preliminary objection was taken by the learned Government Advocate that the learned counsel who has presented this application not having been appointed his Pleader by the accused the application should be thrown out. As this was a matter of some importance for guidance of future practice in this Court, I heard the learned counsel on it at some length. Now there is nothing in the Criminal Procedure Coda corresponding to Order 3, Rule 1, Civil P.C., requiring an accused to be represented by a duly appointed Pleader. For that reason it has been the invariable practice in at least one High Court, viz., the Patna High Court, to allow advocates to appear and act for accused persons in criminal cases WITHOUT any authority ...
Beg Ram and anr. Vs. Charan Das and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-03-1950
Reported in: AIR1951HP16
ORDERChowdhry, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' application in revision under para. 35 (1) (a), Himachal Pra-desh (Courts) Order, 1948. They sued the defendants in the Court of the Senior Subordinate Judge at Kasumpti for possession of a certain immovable property as nearest reversioners to the estate of the last maleholder of that property. For the determination of the Question whether the plaintiffs were such reversioners, they had to prove a pedigree, and they filed in that connection a certified copy, EX. Y, of an entry in a register. The learned Subordinate Judge by an order dated 16-5-1949 rejected this document holding on the authority of Basant Singh v. Brij Raj Saran, A.I.R. (22) 1935 P. C. 132 : (57 ALL 494) and on an interpretation of Section 90, Evidence Act, that the document, being a copy of a copy, was not admisaible in evidence. It is against this order that the plaintiffs have come up in revision.2. Two preliminary objections have been taken on behalf of the defendants-respo...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›