Himachal Pradesh Court September 1953 Judgments

Lal Singh Vs. the State

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1954HP43

Chowdhry, J.C. 1. This is an application in revision by Lal Singh against the order of the learned District Magistrate of Mandi, dated 29-7-1953, directing further enquiry against the petitioner. 2. It appears that the present petitioner along with 4 others viz. Narotam, Briju, Rewalu and Budhi Singh, was challaned under Section 366, read with Section 34, I. P. C. The case against them was that a minor girl named Shanti was kidnapped by Briju and Narotam from the lawful guardianship of her uncle Kesru (the girl's father being dead and mother having taken another man for her husband) and handed over to the present petitioner Lal Singh, and that Lal Singh sold her for Rs. 1600/- to Rewalu. The latter married the girl subsequently with the help of Budhi Singh. The learned first class trying Magistrate discharged all the 5 accused. The State went up in revision against the discharge of the present petitioner Lal Singh alone, and the learned District Magistrate passed the order of further e...

Hari Kishan Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1954HP39

Chowdhry, J.C.1. This is an application in revision by one Hari Kishan against his conviction and sentence of 6 months' rigorous imprisonment under Section 498, I. P. C., by a first class Magistrate on his appeal having been dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi. The charge found proved against him was that he was detaining Mst. Tuli who is and whom the petitioner knows to be the wife of the complainant Chunju with intent that she may have illicit intercourse with him. The defence, disbelieved by the two Courts, was that she was living with the petitioner of her own free will and accord under a contract of service whereunder Mst. Tuli was to serve him for one year and the petitioner to repay a loan of Rs. 200/- which she had contracted from one Nathu to build a house for herself on being turned out by the complainant.2. Even if marriage and petitioner's knowledge of it be taken as proved by the prosecution neither detention nor intention to have illicit intercourse has, in my ...

Dumni Vs. Saran

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1954HP49

ORDERChowdhry, J.C. 1. The petitioner Mst. Dumni's application for maintenance under Section 488, Cr. P. Code, was dismissed by a Magistrate first class on 8-12-1952. She put in a fresh application on 29-12-1952 on the allegation that after the dismissal of her first application she went to her husband's house with the object of living with him but was turned out by him on 13-12-1952 after being beaten, and that since then the husband had refused and neglected to maintain her. 2. The learned Magistrate, who incidentally was the same who had dismissed the previous application, dismissed the second application, without making any enquiry on the ground of the first application having already been dismissed and there being no fresh ground in the second application. 3. The learned Sessions Judge endorsed these findings. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and am of the opinion that in this view both the Courts below were in error. From what has been stated above it is clear tha...

Devi Singh Vs. Bhagat and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1954HP41

ORDERChowdhry, J.C.1. This was a suit by three persons, Bhagat, Suresh and Boota for recovery of Rs. 4761/- on a bond against Devi Singh, Sant and Puran Chand. The trial Court decreed the suit against Devi Singh alone and dismissed it against the other two defendants. Devi Singh appealed to the District Judge and impleaded as respondents the other two defendants and two others, named Ramsaran and Jiwanu but none of the three plaintiffs. Later, an application was filed on behalf of the defendant appellant Devi Singh before the District Judge under Order 41, Rule 20, C. P. C., for impleading the three plaintiffs.This application was rejected by the District Judge. By the same judgment he dismissed theappeal holding that as a result of the dismissal of the application under Order 41, Rule 20 the appeal was not properly constituted and therefore not en-tertainable. The present revision has been filed by the defendant Devi Singh only against the order of the District Judge rejecting the sai...

Ramji Das Vs. the State

Court: Himachal Pradesh

ORDERChowdhry, J.C.1. This is a revision petition by one Ramji Das who was ordered by a first class Magistrate of Mandi to execute a bond in Rs. 1000/-and furnish one surety in like amount to be of good behaviour for a period of one year under Section 109 (b), Cr. P. C. The petitioner failed to furnish the security and has been undergoing rigorous imprisonment for one year since the passing of the order by the Magistrate on 9-3-1953. His appeal from jail was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, and now he has filed the present revision. 2. It has been found against him both that he had no ostensible means of subsistence and that he could not give a satisfactory account of himself. Neither of these findings appears, however, to be well founded. So far as the first finding is concerned the record shows that the police as well as the Magistrate confined attention merely to the fact that the petitioner had no ostensible means of subsistence in Mandi where he was arrested on 16-10-1952,...

Ram Saran and anr. Vs. Bansi Lal and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1954HP36

ORDERChowdhry, J.C.1. This is a defendants' application in revision against an interlocutory order passed by the Subordinate Judge of Mandi on 27-6-1952 whereby he allowed the plaintiff-respondent's application dated 12-6-1952 for production of additional documentary evidence.The suit was for recovery of an amount alleged to be due on a bond said to nave been executed by Mt. Nardu, predecessor-in-interest of the present petitioners. The parties had closed their evidence on 26-5-1952, arguments were heard on 31-5-1952 & 13-6-1952 was the date fixed for pronouncement of judgment. The aforesaid application en behalf of the plaintiff was filed, as stated above, one day before the date fixed for pronouncement of the judgment, and the additional documentary evidence sought to be produced consisted of the previous bonds executed by Mt. Nardu since the time when she originally took the loan from the plaintiff.2. The application purported to be one under Section 151, C. P. Code. It stated that ...

Balak Ram and anr. Vs. Sadh

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR1954HP40

ORDERChowdhry, J.C.1. This is a reference under Section 438, Cr. P. Code, by the learned Sessions Judge of Mahasu. The reference relates to an order passed by a first class Magistrate in proceedings under Section 145 of the Code. The proceeding was started by Sadh against Balak Ram, Mathu and two others. The revision in the Court of the Sessions Judge on which the present reference has been made was filed by only Balak Ram and Mathu. The two latter are absent despite notice to their counsel. Only Sadh is present. The reference is however misconceived. 2. It appears that after holding an inquiry as prescribed by Section 145 of the Code, the Magistrate concerned issued an order declaring Sadh to be entitled to possession of the land in question until evicted therefrom in due course of law, and forbade all disturbance of such possession until such eviction. He further ordered that possession of the land be restored to Sadh. As stated above, two of the opposite parties, Balak Ram and Mathu...