Himachal Pradesh Court March 2007 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.
Gian Chand Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC371
Surjit Singh, J.1. Appellant is aggrieved by the judgment of the Sessions Judge, whereby he has been convicted of an offence, under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, for allegedly possessing 10 Kilograms of Charas at a place called Koti Bridge, within the jurisdiction of Police Station, Sadar Chamba, on 19.12.2001 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of three years.2. Prosecution version is that on 19.12.2001, a police party headed by ASP Gyaneshwar Singh and comprising as its other members Inspector Kulwant Singh, HC Ajit Singh, HC Surinder Kumar, LHC Kartar Singh and constable Manohar Lai went towards Koti Bridge and when they reached near a temple, the appellant was found sitting by the road side and on seeing the police, he tried to flee along a foot path. He was chased and overpowered. He was carrying a ...
Pune Ram Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC360
Surjit Singh, J.1. Appellant is aggrieved by the judgment dated 28.6.2003 of the learned Sessions Judge, whereby he has been convicted of offence, under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, for allegedly being in possession of eleven kilograms of 'Charas' on 5.4.2003 at a place in the forest area of village Shilaru, Tehsil Ani, District Kullu, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of rupees one lac and in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of two years.2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Advocate General and have also gone through the evidence with the assistance of the learned Counsel for the appellant.3. Learned Counsel for the appellant stated that there were contradictions in the evidence of the witnesses of the alleged search and seizure, which made the prosecution version about the appellant having been caught with the cont...
Shiv Chand Vs. Manghru and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-06-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC389
Surjit Singh, J.1. Heard and gone through the record.2. Suit was filed by the plaintiff-appellant, seeking issuance of permanent, prohibitory injunction against the respondents-defendants, restraining them from raising construction on any portion of the land, measuring 1 Bigha 3 Biswas, which was alleged to be in joint possession of the parties, though owned by the State Government. It was alleged that without seeking partition or without obtaining the consent of the plaintiff-appellant, the respondents-defendants had started preparation for raising construction on a portion of the said property.3. Suit was contested by the respondents-defendants and it was alleged that partition had taken place long-long back and the parties were in separate possession of their shares. Several preliminary objections were also raised. The trial Court concluded that the property was jointly possessed by the parties and unless partition took place or the consent of the plaintiff-appellant was obtained, r...
inderjit Singh and anr. Vs. State of H.P. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-06-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC407
Deepak Gupta, J.1. The petitioners by means of this writ petition have prayed that the excess tax paid by them, orders for refund whereof have been made by the assessing authorities be ordered to be refunded to them alongwith interest as legally admissible in terms of Section 18 of the H.P. General Sales Tax Act (GST). Section 12-A of the H.P.G.S.T. Act provides that every person making payment or discharge of any liability involved in the execution of works contract shall deduct an amount not exceeding four percentum from the bills or invoices raised by the works contractor. The person making any payment to a work contractor is bound to make deduction on account of sales tax at the rate of 4 percentum from the amount paid to the contractor and deposit the same with the Sales Tax Authorities. Obviously this tax deducted at source has to be taken into account at the time of final assessment of the returns filed by the contractor.2. In the present case the various returns of the petition...
Rajesh Kumar Vs. Deputy Commissioner and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-01-2007
Reported in: AIR2007HP45,2007(1)ShimLC392
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This petition is directed against the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Shimla dated 5-12-2006, whereby he has allowed the Appeal No. 17 of 2006 filed by respondent-Deep Ram ordering recounting of votes.2. Brief facts leading to the present case are that election to the post of Pradhan, Gram Panchayat, Kalind, Tehsil Theog, District Shimla were held on 20-12-2005. There were six candidates in all who contested the election. Petitioner-Rajesh Kumar was declared to have been elected after he defeated Deep Ram by seven votes.3. Deep Ram respondent No. 1 herein challenged the election of Rajesh Kumar by filing Election Petition under Section 163 of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 before the authorized Officer i.e. S.D.O. (Civil), Theog, District Shimla. The main ground of challenge was that 27 votes had been wrongly rejected by the Returning Officer and there was discrepancy of two votes when all the votes were totalled. It was alleged that 27 votes had bee...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›