Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Jul-02-2010
R.B. Misra, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The present Criminal Appeal has come up for consideration after the grant of leave to appeal under Section 378(3) of the Code of criminal Procedure in reference to the judgment dated 20.9.1996 passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, HP in Sessions trial No. 50-N/7 of 1995, under Sections 457 and 376 IPC thereby acquitting the alleged accused/respondent.3. In order to adjudicate the present appeal, it is necessary to give the factual background of the case that the prosecturix is married woman, aged 30 years was having children of 7 years and 3 years, alleged to have been sexually assaulted by the accused in the absence of her husband, namely Randhir Singh when he was away on 9.6.1994. The accused had allegedly knocked the door in the night of 9/10th June, 1994, but the door was not opened, then accused opened the door with the help of 'Drat' and came inside and sexually assaulted the victim-prosecutrix w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-03-2010
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 7.5.2007 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Una in Sessions Case No.01 of 2006, Sessions trial No.4 of 2006, whereby the appellant, who was charged with and tried for offence under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of ` 25,000/-. In case of default of payment of fine, the appellant was directed to further undergo simple imprisonment for 3 months. He was also held entitled to the benefit of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that on 14.9.2005 S.I. Diwan Chand (PW-26), Station House Officer, Police Station, Amb, District Una received a telephonic message from A.S.I. Vishwas Kumar (PW- 22), Incharge, Police Post, Chintpurni regarding the murder of one lady in Sahil Hotel, Chintpurni. On receipt of this information, PW-26 reached Sahil Hotel, Chintpurni where Su...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : May-21-2010
Kurian Joseph, C.J.1. The question that arises for consideration in this case is whether the Telegraph Authority is bound to pay the land value by way of compensation while exercising its power to lay a telegraph line or post in any property. Section 10 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 provides for the power to place and maintain telegraph lines and posts. It reads as follows:10. Power for telegraph authority to place and maintain telegraph lines and posts.- The telegraph authority may, from time to time, plce and maintain a telegraph line under, over, along or across, and posts in or upon, any immoveable property;Provided that-(a) the telegraph authority shall not exercise the powers conferred by this section except for the purposes of a telegraph established or maintained by the Central Government, or to be so established or maintained;(b) the Central Government shall not acquire any right other than that of user only in the property under, over, along, across, in or upon which the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : May-04-2010
Kuldip Singh, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment, decree dated 9.4.1999 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (I), Kangra at Dharamshala (Camp at Una) in Civil Appeal No. 131/94 RBT. 33/95 affirming the judgment, decree dated 7.6.1994 passed by the learned Sub Judge, 1st Class (I), Amb in Case No. 209 of 1986 decreeing the suit of the respondents.2. The brief facts of the case are that respondents had filed a suit for declaration regarding land comprised in Khewat No. 418, Khatauni No. 1819/1 Khasra No. 6446 measuring 45 Kanals 1 Marla situated in village Lohara, Tehsil Amb, District Una on the grounds that suit land is in possession of the respondents as owners and prior to their becoming owners of the suit land it was in their possession as tenants on payment of rent to the original owners. It has been pleaded that appellants in connivance with the revenue staff got themselves entered as owners qua the suit land to the extent of share from Rabi 1984 at ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : May-04-2010
Rajiv Sharma, J.1. A challenge has been laid by the State to the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge (2), Kangra at Dharmshala in Sessions Case No. 11-K/VII/96, dated 28.10.1997, whereby respondent Dina Nath, who was charged with and tried for offence, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, has been acquitted.2. The case of the prosecution, in a nut-shell, is that on 06.10.1995, at about 5:00 P.M., Bhundu Ram (now deceased), Mast Ram (PW-5) and Khemdi Ram (PW-6) after extracting Alsi oil, were returning home via Baldhar by road and at about 6:00 P.M., all of them sat for taking rest at a place known as Mahrian. In the meantime, accused Dina Nath, son of Bidhi Chand came there, who caught hold of Shri Bhundu Ram from both of his ears and after picking him up threw him forcibly on the ground, and started beating him with 'Hurron Mukkon' (fist blows). He was rescued by PW-5 Mast Ram. Bhundu Ram became unconscious. He reached home at 11:00 P.M. The same night he regained con...
Tag this Judgment!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...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-07-2010
Rajiv Sharma, J.1. A challenge has been laid by the State to the judgment dated 12.8.1997 of the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi in Sessions trial No. 28 of 1996, whereby respondents, who were charged with and tried for offence, under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, have been acquitted.2. Prosecution case, in a nutshell, is that respondent No. 2 Atma Ram is resident of village Marhog in Tehsil Karsog, District Mandi. He has three sons, namely, Labh Singh, Deep Chand and Chet Ram. Labh Singh was married to Krishna Devi deceased. Labh Singh and his younger brother Chet Ram lived together with their mother Simro Devi. Respondent Deep Chand and his family lived with his father Atma Ram. On the morning of 5.6.1996, children of Labh Singh, including his daughter Meera Devi (PW-2) were picking up Shahra fruit (apricot) from a tree. Respondent Deep Chand came there and asked them why they were picking up the fruit. Krishana Devi wife of Labh Singh (PW-4) appeared on th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-06-2010
Surjit Singh, J.1. Appellant, who was plaintiff before the trial Court, has preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree dated 6th November, 1996 of learned District Judge, whereby reversing the judgment and decree, dated 25th August, 1992 of learned trial Court, i.e. Sub Judge 1st Class, Amb, suit of the plaintiff-appellant has been dismissed.2. Facts relevant for the disposal of the appeal may be noticed. Plaintiff-appellant Jaswant, now dead and represented by his LRs, filed a suit for declaration that he was owner in possession of 3 Kanals 2 Marlas land bearing Khasra No. 1817 and that the entries in the revenue papers, showing deceased Kalu, the predecessor of the defendantsrespondents, as tenant of the said land under the plaintiff, were wrong, illegal and of no consequence, and the mutation, conferring the proprietary rights on said Kalu, which was attested, on the basis of said revenue entries, was illegal, void and of no effect on the rights of the plaintiff. It was p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-08-2010
Reported in : AIR2010HP39
ORDERSanjay Karol, J.1. In terms of the present application, the appellant-wife is seeking permission to withdraw her consent recorded on 20-4-2009 with a further prayer that the matter be heard on merits.2. The application is opposed by the respondent-husband.3. The marriage between the parties was solemnized as per Hindu customary rites on 8-12-1980. The parties could not pull along. On 17-1-2001 respondent-husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under Section 13 (1)(ia) & (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petition was opposed by the wife. In terms of judgment and decree dated 16-2-2004, the District Judge allowed the petition and dissolved the marriage on the ground of cruelty.4. The same was assailed by the wife by filing the instant appeal. The appeal was admitted on 28-4-2004 and came up for hearing on 24-2-2009 when learned Counsel for the parties prayed for an adjournment to enable the parties to work ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-06-2010
Deepak Gupta, J.1. The following questions have been referred for decision to the Full Bench:1. What meaning should be assigned to the phrase 'any property of a third party' occurring in Section 147 and 165 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988?2. Whether the goods of a consignor/consignee being carried in a goods vehicle can be termed to be property of a third party?2. The claimants in both these appeals filed Claim Petitions before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shimla under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') in which compensation was claimed for loss of goods being carried in a truck. In both the cases, the owner of the goods was travelling alongwith the goods in the truck.3. In FAO No. 97 of 1999, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation for the personal injuries suffered by the owner but rejected the claim with regard to the goods being carried in the vehicle.4. In FAO No. 209 of 1999 the claim was only with regard to the goods being...
Tag this Judgment!