Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2006CriLJ2862,2006(2)ShimLC78
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This Criminal Revision has been filed by the complainant-Narcotics Control Bureau, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the NCB) against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla dated 27.10.2005 in so far as he has rejected the prayer of the NCB for recalling two witnesses Balbir Singh and Surender Singh.2. The facts necessary for disposal of the case are that the NCB filed a complaint in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Shimla Under Sections 8, 18, 20, 25, 27A and 29 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the NDPS Act) against the accused Yuvraj Gurang and Gurusharan Sharma @ Gulshan. The allegations, in brief, are that: on prior information received the NCB carried out a raid in the premises occupied by Yuvraj Gurang in the basement of Hari Bhawan at Shoghi on National High Way No. 22. This building is stated to be owned by the second accused Gurusharan Sharma who is running Sharma Dhabha therein. Durin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2006(3)ShimLC340
K.C. Sood, J.1. Under challenge in this petition is the order of learned Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3, Shimla dated July 14, 2004. By this order, the vehicle, subject-matter of dispute, was seized by the Police in a case under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, was directed to be released to Ram Pal Chauhan, respondent No. 3, in exercise of the jurisdiction under Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the application of Sanjay Kumar, the petitioner, for release of the vehicle, was rejected.2. Aggrieved, Sanjay Kumar is in this petition under Section 482/ 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Article 227 of the Constitution.3. Brief facts leading to the seizure of the vehicle by the Police and its subsequent release to Ram Pal Chauhan are:4. Prem Singh Thakur, respondent No. 3, was the original owner of Bus 'Swaraz Mazda'. Sanjay Kumar, the petitioner, entered into an agreement with Prem Singh Thakur for the purchase of the vehicle. As per the agreement, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2006CriLJ2093,2006(1)ShimLC332
K.C. Sood, J.1. Appellant Khoja Ram (Accused for short), was tried and convicted for an offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court Kangra at Dharamshala. He was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of rupees 10,000/-. In case of default in the payment of fine, the accused is to undergo further simple imprisonment for six months, by his judgment dated February 18, 2005.2. Dis-satisfied the accused is in this appeal. Prosecution case :3. Anita Devi, hereinafter referred to as the 'victim', was twenty years of age at the relevant time. On May 11, 2002, her sister-in-law Usha Devi (PW4) alongwith her husband had gone to attend the marriage. When she returned back from the wedding at about 6.30 P.M., she gave a packet of sweets to the prosecutrix to deliver it in the house of Rania Ram and also buy and bring soap from the shop but the victim did not return back till about 9.00 P.M. Usha Devi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2006ACJ2511
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This judgment shall dispose of 15 appeals being F.A.O. Nos. 202 to 213 and 233 to 235 of 2003 as they arise out of the same accident and similar awards.2. The brief facts of the case are that an accident of truck No. HP-14 5116 took place on 30.12.1999 near Devimore, Tehsil Theog, District Shimla, H.P. In this accident 18 labourers died, some were injured and the driver and cleaner of the truck also died. Claim petitions were filed by the claimants who are the heirs of the labourers travelling in the truck in question. The averments made in the claim petitions are virtually identical and it is stated that deceased were employees of Jyoti Structures and were skilled labourers. It is also stated that they were travelling in the truck and not a word is stated as to in what capacity they were travelling in the said truck. The owner filed reply stating that the truck was hired by Jyoti Structures and the truck was loaded with materials and thereafter the labourers also bo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2006CriLJ1985
Abhilasha Kumari, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment dated 27th July, 2002 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Solan whereby Naresh Kumar - appellant (hereinafter referred to as the accused') has been convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Code. The learned Sessions Judge, Solan has sentenced the accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case, as emerging from the record, are that on 14th May, 2001 one Anupama, the prosecutrix, who was 15 years of age and studying in the 8th class in Government High School Pwab, had gone to the 'Ghasni' (grass land) to graze cattle and collect wood for fuel. When she returned home at about 12 noon with the cattle she found that four of the cattle heads had not reached the house and therefore, she again returned back to the 'Ghasni' to locate the missing cattl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2006CriLJ2743
Abhilasha Kumari, J.1. In this appeal, the appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') has assailed the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Una, dated 31-3-2003. The Additional Sessions Judge, Una, has charged and convicted the accused for offences under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act and has sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/-under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine, the accused has been ordered to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years. The accused has been further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 7,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 27(1) of the Arms Act and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year. The sentences, so imposed, shall run concurrently. It has also been ordered that out of the fine amount, if r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2006CriLJ2361
ORDERK.C. Sood, J.1. Appellant Gulam Ahmed, hereinafter referred to as 'the accused', was tried and convicted for an offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code for an attempted rape of a minor girl of eleven years, hereinafter referred to as 'the victim'. The accused was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of rupees 10,000/-. In case of default in the payment of fine, the accused in directed to undergo imprisonment for six months.2. Dissatisfied by his conviction, the accused is in this appeal.3. The prosecution case appears to be:The victim, a student of class five and eleven years of age at the relevant time, is daughter of Sant Ram who is blind. The accused along with some Kashmiri labours was employed by Leela Devi, mother of the victim, for felling and sawing 'safeda' trees. In the fore-noon of March 18, 2001, the mother of the victim sent the victim to feed goat in the nearby cow shed. Accused approac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2006(1)ShimLC115
V.K. Jhanji, J.1. This shall dispose of application under Section 151 CPC for recalling of order dated November 7, 2005 passed in CWP 886 of 2003.2. At the outset, we may say that not only the application for recalling order dated November 7, 2005 in CWP 886 of 2003, is an abuse of the process of the Court, but CWP 886 of 2003 too was an abuse of the process of the Court. CWP 886 of 2003 was heard by Division Bench of which I was one of the Members on November 7, 2005. Learned Counsel for the petitioner argued for nearly an hour and after hearing the other Counsel, and on meticulously going through the record of the writ petition, the Bench was of the considered view that the writ petition is nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court and when we were about to dismiss the same with costs of Rs. 40,000/-, learned Counsel for the petitioner Shri Rajiv Sharma, Senior Advocate, in order to save the petitioner from heavy costs, made a statement to withdraw the writ petition. In the li...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2006(1)ShimLC126
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal by the appellant - HRTC is directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (2), Shimla in MAC Case No. 74-S/2 of 1997 decided on 1.8.2000 whereby he has awarded compensation of Rs. 2,87,000/- in favour of the claimant.2. The claimant has also filed cross-objections and the delay in filing the cross-objections has been condoned vide separate order dated 25.11.2005. Both, the appeal and the cross-objections are now being disposed of by this judgment.3. The brief facts necessary for decision of the case are that a claim petition filed by claimant Inder Singh alleging that he met with an accident while he was travelling in bus number HP07-1849 on 18.11.1996. According to the claimant, he is unable to do any work after the accident and is virtually bed ridden.4. The HRTC contested the claim petition and one of the pleas taken was that the driver had unauthorisedly taken the bus. The learned Tribunal has passed the award as aforesaid in favour ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : I(2006)ACC766,2007ACJ1386,2006(1)ShimLC154
Deepak Gupta, J.1. Neelam Anand, the appellant, was a happily married woman. She had a husband and two sons. She worked as a Special Assistant in Canara Bank at Ambala Cantt. On 17.4.1999 she alongwith her husband was traveling from Delhi to Solan in a vehicle bearing No. HR-01F-3692. Then tragedy struck. Near Shahbad there was a collision between this vehicle and another vehicle bearing No. PB-08Q-7535. Neelam Anand lost her husband, K.K. Anand in the said accident and she herself was seriously injured.2. The appellant suffered injury in the spine as a result of which her whole body below damages may vary according to the gravity of the injuries sustained by the claimant in an accident. On account of the injuries, the claimant may suffer consequential losses such as, (i) loss of earning; (ii) expenses on treatment which may include medical expenses, transportation, special diet, attendant charges etc., (iii) loss or diminution to the pleasures of life by loss of a particular part of t...
Tag this Judgment!