Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-19-2012
Crl. Writ Petition No.245 o1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Writ Petition No.245 of 2010 Date of decision : November 19, 2012 Dr. V.L.N.Thakur .....Petitioner VERSUS Union of India and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. Present : Mr.Rajeev Anand, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Gurpreet Singh, Senior Panel counsel for UOI. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner, who is a Veterinary Surgeon and was serving as an Assistant Commandant in Indo Tibetan Border Police Force (for short 'ITBPF') has filed this petition to challenge the proceedings of a General Force Court ('GFC' for short) and the consequential punishment. Though initially the petitioner was sentenced to be removed from service by GFC but this sentence was commuted to loss of seniority for two years a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Dec-05-2012
Criminal Misc. not A-749-MA of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. not A-749-MA of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision:5. 12.2012 Shiv Ram .....Applicant Versus Suraj Bhan and others .....Respondents. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK Present : Mr. Ram Bilas Gupta, Advocate for the applicant. **** 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?. 2.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK J.The present application under Section 378 (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Cr.P.C.' for short), has been filed by the applicant-complainant, seeking leave to file appeal against the judgment dated 28.3.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Bhiwani, whereby the accused-respondents were acquitted of the charge framed against them. The criminal law was set into motion by the applicant by filing a complaint under Section 148/149/323/436/447/506 of the Indian Pen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-01-2012
Sabina, J. Vide this judgment, the above mentioned Criminal Appeal No. 854-DB of 2005 and Criminal Revision No. 21 of 2006 shall be disposed of as these have arisen out of the same judgment/incident. Prosecution case was set in motion on the basis of the statement of the complainant Kuldip Singh. The complainant stated in his statement before Assistant Sub Inspector Vinod Kumar dated 30.4.2002 that at about 1.00 A.M. on the said date, he had reached his fields along with his brother Jagsir Singh and maternal uncle Shamsher Singh for taking turn of water. When he tried to divert the flow of water along with his brother Jagsir Singh, then Balwant Singh armed with .12 bore gun and his sons Jagtar Singh armed with saila and Iqbal Singh armed with dang came there raising lalkaras and tried to stop Jagsir Singh from taking turn of water. The moment Jagsir Singh tried to divert the water, Balwant Singh fired a shot at him from his 12 bore gun which hit him on the left side of his chest. Jagsi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-23-2012
CWP No.11143 of 1995 (O & M) ::1:: IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.11143 of 1995 (O & M) Date of Decision: November 23, 2012 Som Dutt and others ....Petitioners Versus State Bank of India and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr.Ashok Sharma Nabhewala, Advocate, for the petitioneRs.Mr.Tarun Singla, Advocate, for the respondents. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. In this writ petition filed by the petitioneRs.challenge is to the action of the respondent-Bank in terminating their services on 27th July, 1995 whereas they had completed more than 5 years of continuous service in spite of retaining those persons who had joined after the petitioneRs.According to the petitioners this was in violation of Section 25G of The Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short 'the Act').A further prayer has also been made for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to retain the petitioners as Waiters in the canteen service of the resp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-16-2012
CR No.4812 o1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR No.4812 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision: November 16, 2012 Suman Lata Pathak ...Petitioner Versus Raj Kamal Pathak ...Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL Present: Mr.Ashok Sharma Nabhewala, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Sanjay Gupta, Advocate, for respondents No.1. Mr.KS Manrat, Advocate, for respondent No.5. A.N.JINDAL, J. (Oral) The order dated 23.4.2011, refusing the defendant's application for leading additional on the question of Will is under challenge. Heard. The arguments reveal that the defendant/petitioner Suman Lata Pathak had set up a Will dated 26.8.1976 allegedly executed by Ved Parkash Pathak, retired major from the Indian Army, in favour of Pushpa Pathak, who died on 11.9.2002 i.e.subsequent to the filing of the suit. The main controveRs.in the suit is with regard to the Will but no issue was framed in this regard. Had there been a specific issue regarding Will then the defendant coul...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Mar-12-2012
MehinderSingh Sullar, J. Oral: 1. As identical points of law and facts are involved, therefore, I propose to dispose of above indicated three petitions for quashing the similar impugned orders (Annexure P10), by virtue of this common judgment, in order to avoid the repetition. However, the facts extracted from (1) CRM No.M-5449 of 2011 titled as “Mainpal @ Dhilla Vs. State of Haryana and Anr.” would be mentioned in subsequent part of this judgment for ready reference in this context. 2. The challenge in these petitions, is to the impugned order dated 31.1.2011 (Annexure P10), vide which, the application (Annexure P9) filed by the petitioners-accused for re-examining/re-summoning the witness under Section 311 Cr.PC was dismissed by the trial Court. 3. The contour of the facts and material, which needs a necessary mention, relevant for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petitions and oozing out, from the record, is that six criminal ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jun-01-2012
RANJIT SINGH, J. Serious concern shown by the Courts and strict measures to check custodial death or use of criminal force during investigation/interrogation, has not deterred the police force to mend its way and go in for scientific investigation of a crime. Use of violence by police sometime leading to death has apparently gone unabated, despite concerns having been expressed by various Courts in this regard from time to time. The facts in the present case are indicative of a custodial death, though police has made elaborate and detailed efforts to give it a colour of crime on the part of the deceased boy, who has lost his life at the young age of about 17 years. The case of alleged custodial death has apparently come to the notice of this Court on the basis of telegram initiated by Wali Ahmed, a resident of Gurgaon, alleging that his minor son, named Ali Mohammad, was picked up by the police on 26.1.2012 at about 3 P.M. from Khandsa road. The telegram initiated on 3.2.2012 and recei...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-23-2012
Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.- This revision petition is directed against the orders of both the Courts below by which the present petitioner has been ordered to vacate the demised premises (shop) which forms part of property No. 4-G, Municipal No. B-XX.4010, Sarabha Nagar, Ludhiana. 2. The landlord sought the eviction of the tenant on the ground of arrears of rent @ Rs. 900/- per month besides house tax w.e.f. 01.09.1997. The Rent Controller, vide order dated 27.04.2004, assessed the provisional rent which was ordered to be paid on 22.05.2004. The order dated 27.04.2004 was challenged by the tenant by way of CR-2490-2004 in which interim order was passed on 14.05.2004 giving liberty to the tenant to tender the rent w.e.f. March, 2001 upto 30th April, 2003 @ Rs. 900/- per month. The tenant accordingly tendered the rent of that period amounting to Rs. 29,070/-. During the pendency of CR-2490- 2004, the landlord filed an application on 27.07.2004 for passing the order of eviction against the ten...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-03-2012
L.N. Mittal, J.(Oral) - Plaintiff Satnarain @ Satya Narain has filed this revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing order dated 27.01.2010 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Hansi. 2. During the course of trial of the suit, evidence of defendant No. 1 was closed by trial Court's order dated 25.02.2009. Evidence of defendants No. 2 to 6 was closed by trial Court's order dated 10.06.2009. The case was adjourned for rebuttal evidence of plaintiff, if any and for arguments. 3. On 27.01.2010, while the case was fixed for rebuttal evidence of the plaintiff and for final arguments, defendant No. 1 appeared in the Court and informed the Court that he was bed ridden at the time of evidence of the defendants and could not come in the Court. He expressed his desire to make his statement as witness. Learned trial Court vide impugned order Annexure P-1 allowed the said prayer of defendant No. 1 by invoking Section 151 of the Code of Civi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-03-2012
K. Kannan, J. 1. The lis 1. The writ petition is at the instance of an educationed institution challenging the continuance of the proceedings initiated by the respondents under the provisions of the Public Premises Act. It is significant to observe even at the outset that the proceedings before the Estate Officer has not been concluded and the writ petition has been filed when the proceedings were in progress and when the case was posted for hearing to a particular date for further evidence. II. The litigious journey so far (a) Petitioner’s possession of the land of NTPC for running a school 2. The facts leading up to the litigation would require to be quickly visited. An agreement has been entered into between the petitioner and the 1st respondent in respect of property measuring just under 7 acres of land on 26.06.2000. The agreement allows for the petitioner to establish a school conforming to CBSE pattern and allows for construction to be put up at the cost of the petitioner....
Tag this Judgment!