Himachal Pradesh Court April 2010 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.
Geeta Sharma Vs. Vikram Sharma and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
Surinder Singh, J.1. In this Revision Petition, the complainant has challenged the order of learned Sessions Judge passed on 4.2.2009 in Criminal Revision Petition No. 18 of 2008 whereby the order of framing the charge under Section 498-A Indian Penal Code against the respondents was set aside.2. The relevant fact can be stated thus. Petitioner, before her marriage resided in village Seri Tehsil and Police Station Amb District Una, H.P. with her parents. On 12.11.2003 she was married to respondent Vikram Sharma, resident of Chandigarh. She alleged torture and demand of dowry in her matrimonial home, by respondent No. 1 and his relatives, who are the co-respondents.3. She alleged in her compliant that in the month of April, 2004, respondent No. 1 is alleged to have slapped the petitioner and threatened her to tolerate all type of cruelty meted out to her. At that time she was carrying a pregnancy. Thus, fearing her death, she thought it proper to return to the parental house at Amb. The...
Smt. Saraswati Devi and ors. Vs. the Life Insurance Corporation of Ind ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
Surinder Singh, J.1. This second appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law, vide order dated 21.9.2000:(i) Whether the employer on receipt of Authority Letter Ex.PW3/A for the deduction of premium from the salary is legally bound to remit the same to the Life Insurance Corporation in time?(ii) Whether under the Salary Saving Scheme, for no fault of the employee in not remitting the premium as it falls due by the employer to the Life Insurance Corporation, the Corporation is liable to pay the sum assured to the Insured?(iii) Whether under the Salary Saving Scheme on failure on the part of the employer to remit the premium after deduction in time is liable to indemnify the claim of Insured?2. This second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the judgment and decree dated 6th April, 1998, passed by the learned District Judge, Shimla in Civil Appeal No.97/1 of 1992 whereby the learned First Appellate Court while accepting the af...
State of H.P. Vs. Shashi @ Papu
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
Surinder Singh, J.1. State felt aggrieved by the acquittal of the respondent for the offences under Sections 354 and 506 Indian Penal Code, passed by the learned trial Court in case No. 112-1/1999 decided on 19.2.2003, hence the present appeal.2. Heard and gone through the record.3. In short, prosecution case against the respondent is that on 8.3.1999 at about 5.30 p.m., prosecutrix had gone to the fields with cow dung load and to cut the grass. Noticing her alone in the fields, respondent tried to molest her. He embraced her, tore her clothes and also gagged her mouth and dragged her in the fields. Prosecutrix offered resistance and raised alarm. Mohinder Singh working nearby was attracted by the noise. On noticing him, respondent fled-away towards the nullah. Mother-in-law of the prosecutrix along with some other persons came to the spot. Simultaneously, her husband also reached there. Next morning around 9.30 a.m. a written complaint was made by Rajinder Kumar husband of the prosecu...
State of H.P and anr. Vs. Daulat Ram
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
Dev Darshan Sud, J.1. It is undisputed before us by the parties that this case is covered by the decision of this Court in CWP. No. 180 of 2001 titled State of H. P. v. Sarab Dayal decided on 19th July, 2007. Subsequently the Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 1808 of 2007 which was disposed of along with other writ petitions by a common order on 4th March, 2010 titled State of H.P. and Ors. v. Chetru, held as follows:Since common question of law and fact is involved in these Writ Petitions, they are being disposed of by a common order.The issue raised in these Writ Petitions pertains to the question whether 50% of the daily waged service rendered by the original applicants can be counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pension.We find that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the original applicants by several judgments of this Court and the one reported as State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. v. Sarab Dayal Latest HLJ 2007 (1) HP 1292.The learned Senior Additional ...
State of H.P. Vs. Nand Lal
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
Surinder Singh, J.1. The State has felt aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Cr. Appeal No. 29-NL/10 of 2001, decided on 13th February, 2003, whereby the judgment of conviction and sentence, passed by the learned trial Court in Criminal Case No. 62/3 of 2000 dated 20.10.2001, was set- aside.2. Heard and gone through the record of the case.3. In short, the prosecution case can be stated thus. On 28th November, 1999, PW2 Desh Raj, the then SI/SHO, Police Station Ramshehar was on patrolling duty in the Bazar at Ramshehar. The respondent was spotted near the rain shelter. On seeing the police, he got scared, which arose suspicion, as such, he was nabbed and the search of his baggage was conducted. Police recovered eight pouches of country liquor (Himfed No. 1). Out of the recovered pouches, four nips from four pouches were taken as samples. Remaining liquor of the pouches from where the sample was taken, decanted into the bottles. The s...
State of H.P and anr. Vs. Ganpatu Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
Dev Darshan Sud, J.1. It is undisputed before us by the parties that this case is covered by the decision of this Court in CWP.No. 180 of 2001 titled State of H.P. v. Sarab Dayal decided on 19th July, 2007. Subsequently the Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 1808 of 2007 which was disposed of along with other writ petitions by a common order on 4th March, 2010 titled State of H.P. and Ors. v. Chetru, held as follows:Since common question of law and fact is involved in these Writ Petitions, they are being disposed of by a common order.The issue raised in these Writ Petitions pertains to the question whether 50% of the daily waged service rendered by the original applicants can be counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pension.We find that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the original applicants by several judgments of this Court and the one reported as State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. v. Sarab Dayal Latest HLJ 2007 (1) HP 1292.The learned Senior Additional Ad...
Vicky and Sandeep Alias Sanju Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
Surinder Singh, J.1. Petitioners Vikram alias Vicky (Cr.M.P.(M) No. 350 of 2010 and Sandeep alias Sanju were denied anticipatory bail in FIR No. 36 of 2010 dated 5th March, 2010, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 326, 307 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, registered in Police Station, Theog. Thus they were arrested on 22nd March, 2010. They were also denied bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Court of Sessions, hence instant applications for bail.2. Heard and gone through the record.3. Although, both these petitioners have been named in the FIR, but their case is separate from the other co-accused as they were not having any weapon of offence nor they attributed any injuries to any one of members of the complainant party.4. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioners, although petitioner Sandeep alias Sanju was sitting in his Alto car in the Bazar at Sandhu and the other co-accused forcefully occupied his vehicle thus he got scared and ra...
State of H.P and anr. Vs. Tehlu Ram
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-30-2010
Dev Darshan Sud, J.1. It is undisputed before us by the parties that this case is covered by the decision of this Court in CWP. No. 180 of 2001 titled State of H. P. v. Sarab Dayal decided on 19th July, 2007. Subsequently the Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 1808 of 2007 which was disposed of along with other writ petitions by a common order on 4th March, 2010 titled State of H.P. and Ors. v. Chetru, held as follows:Since common question of law and fact is involved in these Writ Petitions, they are being disposed of by a common order. The issue raised in these Writ Petitions pertains to the question whether 50% of the daily waged service rendered by the original applicants can be counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pension.We find that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the original applicants by several judgments of this Court and the one reported as State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors. v. Sarab Dayal, Latest HLJ 2007 (1) HP 1292.The learned Senior Additiona...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Sita Ram
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-29-2010
Surinder Singh, J.1. Respondent Sita Ram was convicted by the learned trial Court for the offence punishable under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, but instead of awarding substantive sentence he was released on probation. He felt aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and as such filed an appeal before the Court of Sessions. The complainant had also filed appeal for enhancement. The appeal of the complainant was dismissed, whereas the appeal filed by respondent Sita Ram was allowed and he was acquitted of the said offence. It is against this order the State felt dissatisfied and filed the instant appeal against his acquittal.2. Heard and gone through the evidence on record in the light of the judgment passed in appeal. Learned Additional Sessions Judge pointed out certain infirmities in the statements of the prosecution witnesses in his judgment and relied upon the defence of alibi.3. Although, respondent Sita Ram was a night Chowkidar in Government High School, Pirthipur. He was su...
Ajam and Shamshu Deen Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-29-2010
Surinder Singh, J.1. Both the petitions are arising from the same FIR hence taken up together for its decision.Heard.Petitioners are accused in FIR No. 251/2009 in a dacoity case registered under Sections 395, 412 and 202 Indian Penal Code in Police Station Sunder Nagar District Mandi, H.P.They failed to get bail from the Court of Sessions as such, the instant application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been moved for their enlargement on bail.2. The challan has been presented in the Court now pending trial.3. In short, prosecution case can be stated thus. Shamshu Deen petitioner was employed driver by Shri Ashwani Kumar resident of Delhi in his Scorpio vehicle bearing Registration No. DL-3CY-8786. On 8th September, 2009, this vehicle entered the boundaries of Himachal Pradesh through the Toll-tax barrier 'Gadamoura' at Swarghat District Bilaspur (H.P.). As per procedure toll-tax entry fee was charged and receipt was issued. The carbon copy thereof was retained ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »