Himachal Pradesh Court September 1978 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.
Nandu Vs. State
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-21-1978
Reported in: 1979CriLJ342
ORDERT.U. Mehta, C.J.1. The petitioner is convicted and sentenced for committing the offence under Section 325 I.P.C. He is sentenced to simple imprisonment of two months for this offence.2. Simple facts of the case are that according to the prosecution the petitioner-accused is a nephew of the injured person Lahari Ram and litigation between the two is going on about some dispute over the agricultural land. It is said that on 1-12-1976 at about 4 P.M. when Lahari Ram was basking in sunlight along with his family members, namely, his wife Achhari Devi and daughter-in-law Biasa Devi, the accused suddenly came from behind with a Danda and gave Danda blows to Lahari Ram. Lahari Ram began to bleed. At the relevant time there was some marriage at the adjacent village with the result that many persons of the village, including the neighbours and some family members of the injured person had gone to attend that marriage, '.therefore, Lahari Ram could not avail of the assistance of other villa...
Ram Parkash Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-08-1978
Reported in: 1979CriLJ750
ORDERC.R. Thakur, J.1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (shortly called the Code) read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, dated 17-1-1978 and the proceedings before him, has been filed by Shri Ram Parkash, who opposed the sending of the second sample retained by the local authority to the Director of Central Food Laboratory, Calcutta, for purposes of analysis in view of the fact that the sample earlier sent to the Director under the provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was found to be unfit for analysis because the same had decomposed.2. The short facts of the case are that on 21-7-1977 at about 10-45 A.M.. the Food Inspector purchased a sample of cow's milk from the shop of the present petitioner. The same after having been divided into three parts was bottled and sealed as required under the rule. O...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›