Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1976HP1
R.S. Pathak, C.J.1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioners challenge the validity of two, notifications dated January 21, 1974 whereby the Governor of Himachal Pradesh has fixed the headquarters of the Solan Sessions Division and of the Solan Civil District at Nahan in the district of Sirmur.2. Three notifications were issued by the Governor of Himachal Pradesh. The first notification No. 11-2/66-Appt. (DP) (i) dated August 30/31, 1972 was made under Section 7 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and by it the limits of the existing Sessions Divisions were altered and the Sessions Divisions were re-constituted, the limits of the newly constituted Solan Sessions Division being the Solan and Sirmur districts with headquarters at Solan. By the same notification the Governor, acting under Section 9 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, established a court of Session for each of the Sessions Divisions so constituted. A copy of this notification is Anne...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2002CriLJ3949
M.R. Verma, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the accused convict against his conviction and sentence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. He is accused of pouring kerosine oil on the Smt. Bholi Devi and setting her ablaze on 17-5-1999 as a consequence whereof she died on 18-5-1999. The defence of the accused is that Sidhu alias Mohinder, husband of the deceased, is a notorious criminal and deals in the distillation and sale of illicit liquor and the police officials of Police Post, Nagrota Surian, where the report was lodged, are helping Sidhu in his work of illicit distillation whereas the accused had been objected to it. Therefore, he has been falsely implicated in the case.2. During the course of hearing of this appeal when the learned counsel for the appellant was reading statement of Head Constable Parma Nand (PW-15), who partially investigated the case, a doubt arose about the correct recording of the English version of his statement to the following effect:It is inc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1951HP19
Bannerji, J.1. The appellant, Karam Singh, and his brother, lambardar Lehna Singh, were sent up for trial before the Additional Sessions Judge under the following charges; namely, Section 120-B; Sections 302, 447, 364, 436 and 896, Penal Code, read with Section 149, Penal Code.2. The assessors were of opinion that the appellant, Karam Singh, had committed nocrime and they unanimously declared him innocent. Agreeing with the views of the assessors, the learned Judge acquitted the appellant of the five charges but disagreeing with the views of the assessors, he convicted the appellant under Section 302, read with Section 34, Penal Code, for the murder of Habib. The original charge was as follows:'That on 31st Bhadon Section 2004 B. you, in order to achieve the aforesaid common object, formed an unlawful assembly with the accused Karam Singh and other persons mentioned above, and while the rest with the guna, swords, etc., were sent down by you to Sandur, you along with your brother Karam...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1990HP62
V.K. Mehrotra, J.1. Nabha was a Princely State in pre-independence India. It was one of the three Phulkian States. The other two were Patiala and Jind.2. In matter of succession to Chiefship, the Phulkian families normally followed the rule of primogeniture. This was true also of the Ruling family of Nabha. The Chiefship went to the eldest son. Provision was made for the younger sons for their maintenance by grant of Jagir, land or purse.3. When the British became the paramount power in India, the effective control in respect of the various rights of the ruling Princes passed into their hands. They subjected the ruling chiefs to various restrictions. One such restriction was about purchase of property outside the territory of their own State. Office Orders were issued from time to time by the Political Department. One such office order (No. XXXV -- found in the compilation of Rules and Office Orders of Political Department of Punjab Government Edition 1908) said that :'The Government o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1965HP68,1965CriLJ765
Om Prakash, J.C. 1. Dasaundhi, who has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Mahasu, Sirmur, Bilaspur and Kinnaur Sessions Division, under Section 302, I. P. C., for the murder of Shrimati Dhanni, and has been sentenced to death, has filed Criminal Appeal No. 5 of 1965, against his conviction and sentence. . The learned Sessions Judge has also submitted the proceedings, to this Court, for the confirmation of the death sentence. The reference, made by the learned Sessions Judge, has been registered as Reference No. 1 of 1965. This judgment will dispose of both the appeal and the reference.2. The prosecution case against Dasaundhi appellant was as follows :3. Shrimati Dhanni, deceased, was the wife of the appellant. He suspected that Shrimati Dhanni was carrying on with his younger brother, Hari Ram, and intended to do away with him, by poisoning. The appellant was so much obsessed with the suspicion that Shrimati Dhanni had poisoned him that he had consulted Shankru PW-9, who wa...
Tag this Judgment!