Himachal Pradesh Court November 2012 Judgments
Devi Singh Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-30-2012
Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. (Oral) Devi Singh alias Devu, the accused in FIR No.165/98, Police Station, Dharampur, District Solan, has filed this revision against the judgment of conviction made in criminal appeal No.20-S/10 of 2004 by Sessions Judge, Solan confirming thereby the judgment of conviction and sentence made in criminal case No.3/2 of 2002/99 by Judicial Magistrate, Kandaghat, Camp at Solan. 2. The Investigating Officer, Shri Bhim Singh, ASI, Police Station, Dharampur, PW-5 along with other police officials was on patrol duty in the area where the accident occurred. On finding a parapet at right side damaged recently raised suspicion and PW-5 made to stop the vehicle there. They heard cries Bachao-Bachao from the side of Nallah below the road. The police party went to Nallah, where found the ill-fated truck lying turtle. The police party took out the injured, who were five including the driver. Five others occupants were found dead on the spot. The injured persons were taken...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Y.S. Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Through Its R ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-2012
Rajiv Sharma, J. 1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 29.6.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP No. 1988 of 2010. 2. Material facts necessary for the adjudication of this appeal are that respondent No.1- petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner for convenience sake) filed a petition assailing his transfer order dated 4.5.2010 whereby he has been transferred from Campus to Horticulture Research Centre Bajoura. Petitioner has challenged his transfer order on the ground that he was victimized, being President of Non-Teaching Employees Welfare Association. It is also contended by the petitioner that once he was transferred outside the Campus, he could not remain Member of the Non-Teaching Employees Welfare Association. It was also averred by the petitioner that number of posts of Senior Assistants were lying vacant in the Forestry Department of the Campus with the appellant-University. Learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition on ...
Tag this Judgment!Joginder Singh Baggu Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-26-2012
Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. (Oral) Accused Joginder Singh has preferred this revision petition against the judgment dated 17.9.2005, passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Solan circuit Court at Nalagarh in criminal appeal No.31-NL/10 of 2000 concurring thereby with the findings of conviction and sentence recorded against the petitioner by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nalagarh, District Solan on the ground inter alia that both the courts below have based the findings of conviction on conjecture and surmises and without appreciating the evidence of eye witnesses PW-4 and PW-7 Bachna Ram in its right perspective. The version of PW-7 Bachna Ram that the deceased was playing and hanging 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? with pole and as a result thereof the same tilted in one side and he fell down in the river on stones and thereby suffered multiple injuries leading to his death has not been considered at all. PW-4 Ram Krishan could have...
Tag this Judgment!inder Pal Singh Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-09-2012
Oral Kuldip Singh, J. 1. This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioner on bail in FIR No.90/12 dated 22.7.2012, registered at Police Station, Kumarsain for offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A, 376, 382, 201/34 IPC and 3, 4, 5 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. 2. It has been stated that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The investigation in the case is complete and challan has already been submitted in the Court. The further custody of the petitioner will not advance the cause of the justice. The petitioner was arrested on 22.07.2012 and since then he is in custody. The petitioner is ready to furnish bail bonds. The petitioner earlier moved bail application which has been dismissed by learned Sessions Judge, Rampur Bushahr on 9.10.2012. The submission has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail. 3. The status report has been filed. It has been stated that case has been registered on the statement of victim under ...
Tag this Judgment!Karnail Singh Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-08-2012
Sanjay Karol, J. Oral: 1. Matter was taken up at 10 a.m. 2. On 26.3.2004, petitioner (accused) was found to have committed offences, punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, regarding which FIR No.75/04, dated 26.3.2004 (Ex. PW-7/A) was recorded at Police Station Sadar, District Chamba, Himachal Pradesh. Police investigated the matter, which revealed that petitioner was guilty of having committed the aforesaid offences. Challan was presented in the Court for trial and notice of accusation was put to the petitioner for having committed offences, punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 3. In order to establish its case, prosecution examined as many as eleven witnesses and statement of the accused, under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was also recorded, in which he pleaded false implication and stated that the accident took place on account of mechanical defect in ...
Tag this Judgment!Amar Chand Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-08-2012
Oral: Kuldip Singh, J. 1. This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioner on bail in FIR No.67/2012, dated 13.7.2012, registered at Police Station Rohru, District Shimla, under Sections 376, 506 IPC. 2. It has been stated that allegations against the petitioner are that he sexually assaulted his daughter-in-law while she was preparing tea. The petitioner is innocent, he has committed no offence. The petitioner has been implicated by the victim at the behest of some interested persons in order to grab the property. The allegations against the petitioner are false. There is no legal evidence connecting the petitioner with the offence. 3. The victim is second wife of elder son of petitioner. The first wife of the elder son of petitioner had died. The victim and her husband were living separately and they joined the petitioner only in the last week of June, 2012. The conduct of victim towards other family members was not good, the petitioner had lodged 2-3 com...
Tag this Judgment!Sh. Bihari Lal Vs. Smt. Kundal Dai and Another
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-08-2012
Kuldip Singh, J. (Oral). This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed against the order dated 17.3.2012 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Shimla Camp at Rohru in Crl. Revision No.4-R/10 of 2006 and in Crl. Revision No.15-R/10 of 2008, both decided on 17.3.2012 by common order. 2. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that respondents had filed petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. which was allowed by learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohru on 13.11.2002. The respondents filed Execution Petition for executing judgment dated 13.11.2002. The petitioner took the objection that respondent No.1 was not entitled to any maintenance as she was living in adultery. The objection was dismissed on 6.3.2006. The petitioner filed Crl. Revision No.4-R/10 of 2006 against the order dated 6.3.2006. 3. The petitioner again filed objections against execution of the judgment dated 13.11.2002. The main objection was that respondent No.1 had been living in adultery a...
Tag this Judgment!Tulsi Ram Vs. State of H.P. Through Principal Secretary (industries) t ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-01-2012
V.K. Ahuja , J. 1. The petitioner was allegedly appointed as driver on daily wage basis with the respondent department since 4.1.1990. As alleged by the petitioner, his services were terminated on 8.2.1991. He filed an Original Application before the erstwhile Administrative Tribunal on 24.7.1991. He was granted interim stay and he continued and thereafter, the stay was vacated. 2. The petitioner raised a demand notice before the Labour and Conciliation Officer, who referred the matter to the Labour Commissioner, who ultimately referred the matter to the learned Labour Court. The learned Labour Court vide its impugned award dated 16.7.2009 Annexure P-2, dismissed the petition filed by the petitioner. 3. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has come up by way of the present petition challenging the said award. 4. Notice of the petition was issued to the respondents, who filed reply. 5. It is clear from the impugned award passed by the learned Labour Court that there is nothing to substantiat...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›