Himachal Pradesh Court July 2002 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.
State of H.P. Vs. Lal Singh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1668
ORDERM.R. Verma, J.1. This revision petition under Sections 397, 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure preferred by the State (hereafter referred to as 'the petitioner') is directed against the order dated 31-12-2001 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan directing release of the respondent/accused (hereafter referred to as 'the respondent') in a case under Sections 304-B, 494-A, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Brief facts leading to the presentation of this petition are that the respondent has been arrested for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 304-B, 498-A, 201/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code by Paonta Police. On 27-12-2001 the respondent filed an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereafter referred to as 'the Code') in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur at Nahan for his release on bail which was allowed on the ground that the charge-sheet against the respondent had not been...
Pran Nath Tikku Vs. Rajinder Maheshwari
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-2002
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3772
M.R. Verma, J.1. Since both these petitions raise similar question of law and arise out of the cases having identical facts, therefore, these are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Briefly stated the facts leading to the presentation of these petitions are that the petitioner/complainant (hereafter referred to as 'the petitioner') presented two complaints against the respondent/accused (hereafter referred to as 'the respondent') under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereafter referred to as 'the Act') read with Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code in the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kandaghat. These complaints were registered as complaint Nos. 19/4 and 20/4 of 1997/98. In both the cases the respondent was tried for accusations under Section 138 of the Act. The learned trial Magistrate on the basis of the material brought on record convicted respondent in both the cases under Section 138 of the Act and sentenced him to undergo s...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sumitra Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-25-2002
Reported in: II(2002)ACC98,2003ACJ262
Arun Kumar Goel, J.1. This case came up on 10.7.2002 for consideration of application filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 6, claimants for the release of the amount deposited in this writ and two of them, viz., Yogita Mehta (respondent No. 4) and Yogesh Mehta (respondent No. 5) having attained majority. At that time learned Counsel for the parties jointly submitted that instead of considering the application for release, this matter needs to be heard finally and disposed of at this stage. Mr. Thakur, learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 6, hereinafter referred to as the claimants, submitted that he does not want to file any reply to the writ petition, but will challenge the right of the petitioner to maintain this writ under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India challenging the award that too on quantum, and will support the award on the basis of materials on record of the Tribunal below. It was for this reason that we finally heard the arguments in this case and reserved the jud...
Kamla Nand Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-24-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ547
ORDERLokeshwar Singh Panta, J.1. This appeal is filed by Kamla Nand (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellant') against the judgment and order dated 1-6-1998 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Shimla in Sessions Trial No. 5-S/7 of 1997. By the impugned judgment the trial Court convicted the appellant of the offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo five years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine, the defaulter was to undergo rigorous imprisonment for period of six months.2. The facts of the prosecution case are as follows :The appellant aged about 52 years was employed as Chowkidar in MES, Jutogh Cantt., Shimla in the year 1995. His colleague PW-5 Mohinder Singh along with his family had lived in the neighbourhood of the appellant for about eight years. Thereafter, P.W. 5 shifted to another quarter which was at a distance of about 5-10-minutes walk from the quarter o...
State of H.P. Vs. Sainu Ram
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-15-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ933
R.L. Khurana, J. 1. The present appeal under Section 378, Code of Criminal Procedure, has been directed by the State against the Judgment dated 15-3-1996 of the learned Sessions Judge, Solan, in Cr. Appeal No. 14-NL/10 of 1994 acquitting the respondent of the offence under Section; 16(1-A)(i) read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (for short the Act).2. Briefly stated, the prosecution story is this. The respondent is a sweet meat seller at Nalagarh. On 23-7-1992 Food Inspector P.W. 1 Shri H. L. Pathak purchased 1200 grams of 'Burfi' as sample from the respondent for the purpose of analysis. At that time, the respondent was having about 5 Kgs. of 'Burfi' for sale to the general public. The sample so purchased was divided into three equal parts and after adding the necessary preservative each of the three parts were packed, fastened and sealed in three separate neat, clean and dry bottles. On the sample having been sent for analysis, the Public Analyst repor...
A.C. Gupta Vs. Renu Gautam
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-11-2002
Reported in: III(2003)BC136,2003CriLJ1458
ORDERM.R. Verma, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant/complainant (hereafter referred to as 'the appellant') against the judgment dated 12.12.1997 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate (III), Shimla whereby the respondent/accused (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent') has been acquitted of the accusation under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. The case of the appellant against the respondent is that the respondent raised a loan of Rs. 50,000/- from the appellant. For repayment of the loan she issued cheque No. 064558 dated 3.5.1995 drawn on Central Bank of India, Shimla. On presentation for encashment, the cheque was received back by the appellant on 20.5.1995 with the remarks 'Insufficient funds' with the result that the cheque could not be encashed. The appellant thereupon issued a registered notice dated 3.5.1995 with a copy sent under the Certificate of Posting to the respondent requesting her to make the payment within fifteen days of th...
Bhim SaIn Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-11-2002
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3992
Arun Kumar Goel, J.1. Petitioner has filed this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 6-12-2001 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Kangra at Dharamshala in Criminal Revision No. 23-B/1999 while allowing the revision filed by respondent State, the order dated 16-11-1999 passed by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Baijnath, has been set aside on an application under Section 309(1) and Section 468 of Criminal Procedure Code as also another application under Section 311, Cr. P. C. for recall of Shashi Kant Awasthi witness who was given up on 11-8-1999 during the course of trial.2. With a view to properly understand and appreciate the respective submissions as projected at the time of hearing of this petition, it is necessary to refer to few facts. Petitioner is being prosecuted on the basis of FIR No. 94/92, registered at Police Station, Baijnath, under Sections 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.3. In this case, trial Court on bei...
State of H.P. Vs. Chet Ram and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-10-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ236
R.L. Khurana, J.1. By virtue of the present appeal preferred under Section. 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the State has assailed the acquittal of the three respondents as recorded vide judgment dated 12-1-1998.2. In case FIR No. 157 of 1996, Police Station, Rampur, respondents Nos. 1 and 2, namely, Chet Ram and Prem Singh were charged for the offences under Sections 447, 506 and 451 of the Indian Penal Code. While respondent No. 3 Sanjokta Devi was charged for the offences under Sections 447 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The respondents pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed trial.3. The learned Magistrate upon consideration of the material placed on record acquitted all the three respondents of the offence under Section 447 of the Indian Penal Code. No findings were recorded with regard to the offences under Sections 451 and 506 of Indian Penal Code.4. Assailing the impugned order of acquittal, it has been contended by the learned Addl. Advocate General that the ...
State of H.P. Vs. Sukh Ram
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-08-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ219
ORDERR.L. Khurana, J. 1. By virtue of the present appeal preferred under Section 378, Code of Criminal Procedure, the State has assailed the acquittal of the respondent Sukh Ram, hereinafter referred to as the accused, of the offence under Section 61(1)(a), Punjab Excise Act, as applicable to the State of Himachal Pradesh, as recorded by the learned Sessions Judge vide judgment dated 11-3-1998 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 1994.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution story is this. On the night intervening 28/29-12-1989 28/29-12-1989 at about 12-30 a.m. PW-6 Sub-Inspector Hans Raj, the then Station House Officer. Police Station, Talai along with certain other police officials was present at Koserian in connection with routine patrolling and detection of excise offences. He received a secret information about the accused being indulged in illicit trade in liquor and that a large quantity of liquor could be recovered if a raid was immediately conducted. On the basis of such information ...
State of H.P. Vs. Kanti Grover
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-03-2002
Reported in: 2004CriLJ4355
ORDERR.L. Khurana, J.1. The present revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401, Code of Criminal Procedure, has been directed by the State against the order dated 2-11-2001 of the learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur at Nahan passed in Bail Application No. 132-BA/22 of 2001 admitting the respondent Kanti Grover to bail.2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present case are these. The respondent was arrested on 14-7-2001 in Case FIR No. 207/2001. Police Station, Paonta Sahib, for the offences under Section 392 and 394 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code. The bail application moved by him before the learned Sessions Judge was dismissed on 14-8-2001.3. The investigation of the case was completed and the final report as contemplated under Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure, was submitted to the Court on 24-9-2001. The copies of the police report as well as other relevant documents as contemplated under Section 207, Code of Criminal Procedure, were supplied to t...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »