Himachal Pradesh Court December 2002 Judgments
Krishan Dass Alias Kisan Dass and Etc. Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-20-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2663
ORDERR.L. Khurana, J.1. The abovenoted two revision petitions arising out of the judgment dated 1-12-2000 of the learned Sessions Judge, Solan, passed in Cr. A. No. 3-S/10 of 2000 are being disposed of together by this judgment.2. Each of the two petitioners hereinafter referred to as the accused stands convicted for the offence under Section 379 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code, by the two Courts below and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine, each of the two accused has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of one month.3. Prosecution story, briefly, may be thus stated, truck bearing registration No. HPN-845 belongs to one Mohanpal Singh. P.W. 4 Mohinder Singh is the father-in-law and general attorney of the said Mohanpal Singh and is operating the truck. On 21-1-1994 the truck developed a mechanical defect. It was, therefore, parked at village Dhiana. On the followin...
Tag this Judgment!Darshan Singh Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-17-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2914
R.L. Khurana, J.1. The present appeal through Superintendent, Model Central Jail, Nahan, has been directed by the appellant, Darshan Singh, hereinafter referred to as the accused, against the judgment dated 16-8-2002 in Sessions Trial No. 34 of 2002 of the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu, whereby he has been convicted for the offence under Section 20, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short the NDPS Act) and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two and a half years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-. In default of payment of fine he has been sentenced to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months.2. Briefly, the prosecution story may be thus stated. On 24-12-2001, P.W. 7 ASI Rattan Lal, In-charge Police Post, Sain] accompanied by P.W. 5 HC Harbans Kumar, P.W. 6 HHC Hem Raj and Constables Bhag Chand and Neel Chand was on patrolling in Larji area. At about 3-30 p.m. when he was proceeding towards Banjar from Larji, he noticed the accused coming fr...
Tag this Judgment!Sallo Ram and Etc. Vs. Kuldip Chand and Etc.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: AIR2003HP148
Arun Kumar Goel, J.1. These are two sets of references which have been ordered to be listed together. 2. While Civil Revision Petition No. 158 of 2001 was being heard, it transpired that an application under Order XVIII, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for recall of plaintiff was filed by the petitioner in this ease which was declined. At the time of hearing of this revision, reference was made by learned counsel for the parties to two decisions of this Court in case Poshu Ram v. Chobe Ram. Civil Revision No. 187 of 1999, Kunji Devi v. Chaman Lal, Civil Revision No. 389 of 1999. In both these decisions, it was held that revision against order passed under Order XVIII, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure being not the 'case decided', as such was not maintainable. Reliance was placed on decisions of the Punjab and Haryana High Court as such both revisions were rejected. There were decisions of this Court to the contrary, i.e. State of Himachal Pradesh v. Shri Sita Ram, 1972 SLJ...
Tag this Judgment!inderjit Singh Avtar Singh Vs. Nathpa Jhakri Power Corporation Ltd.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ARBLR453(HP)
R.L. Khurana, J. 1. The petitioner Messrs Inderjit Singh Avtar Singh, a registered partnership firm and carrying on the business as registered Government Contractors, entered into an agreement with the H.P. State Electricity Board/the predeccssor-in-interest of the present respondent for the execution of the work relating to 'Construction of Pre-stressed Concrete double Line Bridge over river Satluj at Rampur Bushahr on Rampur Bye-pass Road' on the terms and conditions contained in the agreement. The work was to be executed by the petitioner on a total costs of Rs. 7,206 lacs within the stipulated period of 18 months to be reckoned from the 15th day after the issuance of the acceptance letter. Calculating on such basis the original stipulated date for completion of the work was 5.6.1990. For certain reasons, the work could not be undertaken till March, 1993. In the meantime the assets and liabilities of Nathpa Jhakri Project was taken over by the respondent, Nathpa Jhakri Power Corpora...
Tag this Judgment!B.N. Mehta Vs. Kapoor Agencies and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-10-2002
Reported in: I(2004)BC99,2003CriLJ2611
Kuldip Chand Sood, J.1. By this judgment, I propose to dispose of these two petitions B.N. Mehta v. Kapoor Agencies and Anr. (Criminal Revision No. 102 of 2000) and B.N. Mehta v. Kapoor Sons and Ors. (Criminal Revision No. 103 of 2000) as both these petitions raise common questions of law based on similar facts.2. These two petitions are directed against the order of learned Sessions Judge, Shimla dated November 1, 1999 In Criminal Revision No. 25-S-10 of 1998 impugned in Criminal Revision No. 102 of 2002 and in Criminal Revision No. 26-S-10 of 1998 impugned in Criminal Revision No. 103 of 2002.3. Facts in brief:B.N. Mehta, petitioner herein (referred to accused hereinafter) was General Manager of the Shimla Central Co-operative Consumers Store Ltd. (Super Bazar), Shimla hereinafter referred to as 'Super Bazar' at the relevant time. He issued certain cheques to the respondents, hereinafter referred to as complainant(s) in his capacity as General Manager of the Super Bazar. These cheque...
Tag this Judgment!State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Rasheed Ahmed and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-05-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2591
ORDERM.R. Verma, J.1. This revision-petition under Sections 397, 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the petitioner/State (hereafter referred to as 'the petitioner') against the order dated 24-5-2000 passed by the learned Special Judge, Sirmaur Sessions Division at Nahan whereby he had discharged the respondents/accused (hereafter referred to as 'the accused persons') of the offences under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 14 of the Himachal Pradesh Prevention of Specific Corrupt Practices Act, 1983.2. Brief facts leading to the presentation of the present petition are that on the report made by Pradeep Kumar, Range Officer, Nahan, Police Station Enforcement (South Zone, Shimla) on 12-5-1995 registered case F.I.R. No. 116/95 under Sections 379, 420, 120-B, I.P.C., 26, 41, 42 of the Indian Forest Act, Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 14 of Himachal Pradesh Prevention of Specific Corrup...
Tag this Judgment!Surinder Kumar Vs. State of H.P. and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-03-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2900
ORDERM.R. Verma, J.1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereafter referred to as 'the Code') has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 10-4-2002 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur at Nahan whereby he has dismissed revision petition preferred by the petitioner and respondent No. 2 against the order dated 1-10-2001 passed by the learned trial Magistrate whereby an offence under Section 409, IPC has been added to the charge framed against them.2. Brief facts leading to the presentation of this petition are that on submission of a charge-sheet against the petitioner and respondent No. 2 under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B, IPC, the learned trial Magistrate framed charges against them for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 472 read with Section 120-B, IPC. When the trial was at the final stage and the case was fixed for final hearing, the prosecution moved an application under Sectio...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›