Himachal Pradesh Court February 2003 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.
Rakesh Kumar Alias Kukka Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-28-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3503
ORDERArun Kumar Goel, J.1. Heard learned counsel.2. This application under Section 438, Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner for admitting Him to bail for offence alleged against him under FIR No. 98 of 2003 of Police Station Una. This FIR was registeredon 3-2-2003.3. As per allegations of the prosecution, petitioner and one Raj Kumar, when checked by the Police, were allegedly carrying the contraband. Further case alleged against them is, that so far Raj Kumar is concerned, he was found to be in possession of 70Grams of contraband i.e. charas, whereas the petitioner is alleged to have thrown away the contraband weighing 1030 grams and also having fled away from the spot. This position has been seriously contested by Mr. Thakur. As according to him this is the handy work of the police to have shown his client to be in possession of commercial quantity so that he is not able to get benefit of provision of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (here-i...
AmIn Chand and ors. Vs. Bhagtu and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-27-2003
Reported in: AIR2003HP161
ORDERArun Kumar Goel, J.1. This appeal was admitted on 17-12-1996 on the following substantial questions of law :1. Whether the learned Courts below appreciated the provisions of law applicable, pleadings of the parties and evidence adduced by them in the case in hand in its true and correct perspective? 2. Whether the impugned judgments and decrees are legally and factually sustainable in the eye of law ?3. Whether document Ex. PW 2/A has been misappreciated and misread by both the learned Courts below?4. Whether the change in the revenue entries without following the procedure prescribed in Land Record Manual renders the said change null and void?5. Whether the statement of DW-1 has been misappreciated by the learned Courts below thereby vitiating the impugned judgments and decrees?6. Whether the presumption of truth attached to jamabandi is rebutted, reliable and cogent evidence?2. Learned counsel for the parties have been heard on the above and with their assistance record of the C...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›