Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2000ACJ666
L.S. Panta, J.1. Petitioners, namely, Abhilasha (widow), Sushil Kumar and Kuldip Kumar (minor sons) of deceased Hira Singh, have filed this writ petition claiming Rs. 10,00,000 as compensation with interest at the rate of 18 per cent on account of death of said Hira Singh, who died in the forest shed alleged to have been constructed by the respondent Corporation.2. The relevant facts giving rise to the present case are as follows:Hira Singh was a registered labour supply mate of the respondent Corporation. He had been undertaking works on behalf of the respondent Corporation for felling, conversion of timber, fuel wood, manual carriage, ropeway carriage besides extraction of resin. He submitted his tender for extraction of resin for 1997-98 season. His tender was accepted by the respondent Corporation and an agreement was entered into between the parties. On 27.7.1997, Hira Singh went to the Forest Depot in Forest Division, Nerwa, for weighing the resin. When he was sitting in the fore...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 1998ACJ632
Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J.1. Petitioners, namely, Dev Kala (widow), Usha, Dodi, Kolti (minor daughters), Uttami (mother), Duni Chand and Jeet Ram, brothers of deceased Bhinder Singh have filed this writ petition claiming a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- as compensation on account of the death of said Bhinder Singh in police custody by merciless beating by the police.2. The relevant facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows:3. On 2.6.1993 there was a robbery in village Mashara Thawa Kothi Naggar, District Kullu and Manali. Police registered case F.I.R. No. 110 of 1993 dated 4.6.1993 under Sections 457/380 Indian Penal Code. Chhaju Ram, respondent No. 4, was Station House Officer and A.S.I. Sohan Lai, respondent No. 5, was the Additional Station House Officer attached to Manali Police Station. Both these police officials had summoned Bhinder Singh amongst others in connection with the investigation of the said F.I.R. He was arrested on 5.6.1993. The petitioners have alleged tha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : II(1997)DMC533
M. Srinivasan, C.J.1. This case has come before us on a reference by a Single judge of this Court. The question referred to is :'Whether in the face of the provisions of Sections 2(6) and 2(32) of the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati Raj Act, 1995 the cases under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which were pending on the date of coming into force of the Act before Courts, are liable to be transferred in the absence of there being any specific provision in the Act ?'2. The learned Judge could not agree with the view expressed by Justice Vaidya in Hari Devi v. Bhagat Singh & Anr., 1996(2) S.L.J. 1625, that on the passing of the Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 the cases pending before the Judicial Magistrate shall be transferred to the Gram Panchayat.3. The facts have been set out in the order of reference. It is not necessary to repeat the same herein. Suffice it to point out that the Himachal Pradesh Panchyati Raj Act, 1968 (Act 19 of 1970) was repealed by the Himachal Pradesh Panchayati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : I(1997)DMC467
M. Srinivasan, C.J.1. The respondents herein filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 25.2.1993 on the file of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hamirpur for maintenance. The first respondent is the wife of the petitioner and respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are the children born out of the wedlock. The allegation of the 1st respondent was that her husband, petitioner herein had neglected and refused to maintain the respondents without any lawful excuse despite having sufficient means of income, whereas according to her she had no source of income to maintain herself and the children. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate found that the 1st respondent had no valid excuse to be away from the husband and as such she is not entitled to maintenance from him. However, he proceeded to grant maintenance in favour of the three children @ Rs. 250/-per month. The petitioner did not challenge that order as he was willing to pay maintenance to the children. The firs...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 1980CriLJ748
V.D. Misra, C.J.1. 'Whether the period of detention of an accused person in police custody under Sub-section (21) of Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is to be included while calculating the period of 90 days or 60 days under clauses (i) and (ii) respectively of paragraph (a) of the proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 167 of the amended Code?' is the question referred to this Bench by one of us (H.S. Thakur, J.) The relevant part of Section 167, before Its amendment by Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1978. was in the following terms:167 (11 whenever any person is arrested and detained in custody, and if appears that the investigation cannot be completed within the period of twenty-four hours fixed by Section 57, and there are grounds for believing that the accusation or information is well-founded, the officer-in-charge of the police station or the police officer making the investigation, if he is not below the rank of sub-inspector, shall forthwith transmit ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2002CriLJ4447
ORDERLokeshwar Singh Patna, J.1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by petitioner-Ashok Madan seeking to quash complaint No. 49-3/94 filed against him by Director Town and Country Planning Department-respondent herein pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class (II), Shimla for commission of offences under Sections 38 and 39 of Himachal Pradesh Town and Country Planning Act, 1977 (Act No. 12 of 1977).2. The Act No. 12 of 1977 was enforced by the State Government in the area which comprised Shimla Planning Area from appointed day i.e. November 30th, 1977. The existing land use of Shimla Planning Area was prepared, published and frozen under Sections 15 and 16 of Act No. 12 of 1977 on 29-12-1977 and 14-3-1978 respectively. The Interim Development Plan for Shimla Planning Area was prepared under Section 17 of the Act which was published in the Himachal Pradesh Rajpatra on 31-3-1979. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2005CriLJ4734
Surjit Singh, J.1. Through these two appeals, appellants have challenged the judgments dated 25-6-2004 of learned Additional Sessions Judge (Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court), Una, delivered in two cross cases. In one ease, which has given rise to Appeal No. 264 of 2004, the appellants, namely Dilbag Singh, Ranjit Singh and Mukhtiar Singh, have been held guilty of offences under Sections 307, 323 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code, for allegedly causing injuries to Shiv Kumar, Pawan Kumar, Didar Singh and Sukhdev Singh, by means of sharp edged as also blunt weapons in an incident that took place on 8-11-1999, at a place called Sanoli, falling within the jurisdiction of Police Station, Una. The said appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of Rs. 20.000/- each, for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous Imprisonment for a further period of two years each.2. In the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Rajiv Sharma, J. 1. This petition is directed against the order dated 14.6.2013 rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge Chamba in Criminal Revision No.2/13, whereby he has upheld the order dated 29.10.2012 rendered by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamba, in Case No.91-IV/11. 2. œKey facts? necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the marriage between Harinder Katoch (hereinafter referred to as the œpetitioner for the sake of convenience) and Smily Sharma (hereinafter referred to as the œrespondent? for the sake of convenience) was solemnized on 6.5.2006 as per Hindu rites at Chamba. The petitioner treated the respondent nicely for about 2-3 months after the marriage. Thereafter, he developed habit of drinking and started maltreating and beating the respondent under the influence of liquor. The petitioner gave severe beatings to the respondent in the month of August, 2006. Her jaw was got fractured. She was got treated by her parents. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Rajiv Sharma, J. 1. This petition is directed against the order dated 21.6.2013 rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge-1 Kangra at Dharamshala in Criminal Revision No.9-P/2012, whereby he has upheld the order dated 21.10.2011 rendered by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kangra at Dharamshala in Criminal Petition No.47-IV/2008. 2. œKey facts? necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the marriage between Shiv Kumar (hereinafter referred to as the œpetitioner for the sake of convenience) and Sunita Devi (hereinafter referred to as œrespondent No.1? for the sake of convenience) was solemnized as per Hindu rites at Village Rasan, Tehsil Dharamshala, District Kangra. Out of the wedlock, respondent No.2 Kumari Ashima was born on 15.3.2008. According to respondent No.1, relations between the parties remained cordial for about 3-4 months after marriage. Even when she was pregnant, petitioner and his family members continued harassment and torment. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 1996CriLJ557
ORDERD.P. Sood, J.1. All the four abovesaid petitions/ revision arise out of a criminal case registered pursuant to F. I. R. No. 10 of 1982 dated 23rd March, 1982 under Section 379, 420, 467, 468, 109, 34 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 33, 41 and 42 of Indian Forest Act and under Sections 5(1) (d) and 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 lodged in the Police Station (Enforcement) South Zone, Shimla, As the facts pertaining to the alleged commission of offences by the petitioners accused are common, I proceed to decide them together by a common order.2. The brief particulars of the abovesaid petitions may be stated as under :-Sr. Nature of the Name of the Designation at the ChargeNo. petition with accused. material time. No. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1. 2. 3. 4. 5.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1. Cr. Rev. No. 99 1. Sh. Chet Ram. For...
Tag this Judgment!