Himachal Pradesh Court January 1989 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.
Jit Ram Vs. Smt. Cheli and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-13-1989
Reported in: 1989CriLJ1852
ORDERR.S. Thakur, J.1. This revision petition under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. is directed against the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi, Kullu and Lauhal Spiti Districts, campat Kultu, dismissing the revision petition filed by the petitioner Jit Ram herein, against the order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lauhal and Spiti District at Kullu, dated September 29, 1986 in proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr. P.C. whereby respondent No. 2 Guddi, minor daughter of respondent No. 1 Smt. Cheli was allowed maintenance at the rate of Rs. 200/- per month.2. The facts are that the respondent Cheli Devi filed a petition under Section 125 of the Cr. P.C. for herself and on behalf of the minor daughter Guddi as her next friend against the petitioner whereby she prayed that she be allowed maintenance at the rate of Rs. 300/- and the minor daughter Rs. 200/- per month. In that petition, she claimed that she was legally wedded wife of the petitioner which marriage too...
Saroop Kumar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-13-1989
Reported in: 1989CriLJ1884
ORDERR.S. Thakur, J.1. This Criminal Revision Petition has been registered on the application of the revisionist Saroop Kumar, wherein he has stated that he was tried and convicted for an offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kangra at Dharamsala, vide his order dt. Dec. 6, 1983, which order was then set aside, in appeal, by this High Court vide order dt. April, 3, 1985, holding that the commitment order as also the trial of the revisionist by the Additional Sessions Judge in pursuance to the commitment order were without jurisdiction since the revisionist was a child at the relevant time. The revisionist was, thereafter tried for the same offence by the Children's Court at Una which Court after holding him guilty ordered that the revisionist be kept for a period of seven years for the offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code in Special School at Haroli or in any other Special School or Reformatory School or Borstal School or any other institu...
Prem Singh Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-06-1989
Reported in: 1989CriLJ1903
Bhawani Singh, J.1. The appellant, Prem Singh alias Prem Bahadur, has by this appeal challenged his conviction and sentence by Sessions Judge, Solan and Sirmour Districts, whereby he has been convicted under Section 304, Part II of the Indian Penal Code to undergo sentence of 5 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of the payment of fine for further imprisonment of 6 months. Besides, he has also been convicted under Section 460 of the Indian Penal Code whereunder he has been sentenced to undergo regorous imprisonment for 2 years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of the payment of fine, he was to suffer further imprisonment for 3 months. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. Needless to say that the appellant has been given benefit under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure thereby benefitting the appellant to set off the period of detention suffered by him during investigation and trial.2. The prosecution ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›