Court : Sikkim
Sunil Kumar Sinha, CJ. 1. By way of introduction, it may be stated here that this is a Public Interest Litigation seeking effective implementation of the National Rural Health Mission (for short NRHM) in the State of Sikkim by issuing appropriate orders to provide for required facilities and personnel in remote rural villages of the State, focussing in particular on the health of Women, Children and Senior Citizens being Marginalised Groups of society. It is also concerned with the violation of Articles 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution alleging failure on the part of the Respondents to provide adequate facilities to women in terms of reproductive and child health services. 2. Before proceeding further, it may be elucidated here that the National Health Mission (NHM), whose vision is the Attainment of Universal Access to Equitable, Affordable and Quality health care services, accountable and responsive to people s needs, with effective inter-sectoral convergent action to address the wi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sikkim
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J. 1. The Petitioner by filing this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeks the following reliefs:- (a) to issue a Writ/Order or direction/mandamus (sic) to direct the Respondent No.3 to issue a Fresh Passport to the Petitioner within a time frame; (b) to issue appropriate Writ/Order or direction, directing the Respondents to treat the Petitioner as Indian Citizen; (c) to pass any other direction/s, relief/s, order/s that may be deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of this case. 2. The facts leading to this Petition are that, the Petitioner is a Buddhist Monk, residing in the Rumtek Monastery, East Sikkim and was born on 21-11-1972 at Rumtek, to his father, a Tibetan Refugee and his mother, a Sikkimese. He is in possession of an Aadhaar Card issued by the Government of India and has a Permanent Account Number (PAN) issued by the Income Tax Department, Government of India. On 15-12-2013, the Petitioner made an Online Applicat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sikkim
Order (Oral): 1. Petitioner No.1 is the sole accused in GR Case No. 192/2015 (State of Sikkim vs. Yogesh Rai) under Sections 457/380 IPC, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate (East and North) at Gangtok, East Sikkim. The said case arises out of FIR No. 18/2015 registered at Ranipool Police Station, East Sikkim at Gangtok. Petitioner No. 2 is the complainant, who had lodged the said FIR No. 18/2015. 2. Petitioner No. 2, on 05.04.2015, lodged FIR No.18/2015 in Ranipool Police Station regarding the theft committed in her shop in which one LPG cylinder with Regulator, some cigarettes, two bottles of bear and a jar of mustard oil etc., amounting to Rs.4,000/- were stolen. The said articles were seized from the house of Petitioner No. 1. The police, thereafter, filed charge-sheet against the Petitioner No. 1 and the said GR Case was registered in which he is facing trial under Sections 457/380 IPC. 3. Ms. Sedenla Bhutia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners, su...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sikkim
Sunil Kumar Sinha, C.J. 1. This Petition is directed against the Order dated 30.06.2015 passed by the Family Court, East Sikkim at Gangtok in Case No.11/2014 filed u/S.127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( in short, Cr.P.C.). 2. By the impugned order, the Family Court has enhanced the amount of monthly maintenance granted in favour of the Second Respondent, in Family (Crl.) Case No.18/2009, u/S. 125 of the Cr.P.C. 3. The facts, briefly stated, are as under: - Petitioner is father of the Second Respondent. Presently, the Second Respondent is residing separately with his mother, the First Respondent. Earlier, the two Respondents had filed the said Family (Crl.) Case No.18/2009 u/S. 125 of the Cr.P.C., in which a sum of Rs.6,500/- was granted as monthly maintenance to the Second Respondent vide Order dated 19.02.2011. The two Respondents, thereafter, filed Case No.11/2014 u/S.127 of the Cr.P.C. for enhancement of the aforesaid amount. The learned Family Court, after recording evid...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sikkim
Sunil Kumar Sinha, C.J. 1. This Appeal is directed against the Judgment and Decree dated 30.03.2013 passed by the District Judge, Special Division-II, East Sikkim at Gangtok in Title Suit No. 13 of 2012. 2. By the impugned Judgment and Decree, the suit filed by the Plaintiff has been decreed, therefore, the Defendants have filed this Appeal. 3. Brief facts necessary for the decision of this Appeal are as under: - 3.1 Bhaktay Gurung, was having two sons, namely, Ganja Bahadur Gurung and Nirmal Gurung (Plaintiff). Bhaktay Gurung died in the year 1965 and Ganja Bahadur Gurung died in the year 1977. Defendants 1 to 8 are sons of late Ganja Bahadur Gurung and Defendant No. 9 is his second wife. Defendant No. 6, Jiwan Gurung, died during the pendency of the suit and was substituted by Defendants 6, 10 and 11. Bhaktay Gurung was the absolute owner of the suit lands described in Schedule A of the plaint. 3.2 Eight sons of Ganja Bahadur Gurung, who were Defendants 1 to 8 herein, had filed an ea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sikkim
Sunil Kumar Sinha, C.J. 1. Petitioner is the Registered Owner of TATA Truck Number WB-73B/5152. The said truck was seized by Melli Police on 31.05.2015 in connection with FIR No.11/2015, registered u/Ss. 9(b) and (d) and 14 of the Sikkim Anti Drugs Act, 2006 (SADA, 2006) and S. 19 of the Sikkim Trade Licence Act, 1985. 2. According to the Prosecution, cement was loaded in the said truck and it was in possession of the driver and cleaner, who were taking the cement to its destination. When the truck was checked, some controlled substances were found wrapped in a polythene bag which was kept in the driver s cabin. The details of controlled substances are as follows:- (i) 5 Full strips containing (24 x 5) 120 Spasmoproxyvon capsules. (ii) 2 loose strips containing 18 spasmoproxyvon capsules. (iii) One loose strips of Nitrosun-10 containing 08 tablets. (iv) Two small pouches of Ganza. 3. The Prosecution came with the case that the above controlled substances were being carried by the drive...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sikkim
Meenakshi Madan Rai, J. 1. This Appeal challenges the Judgment and Sentence dated 31-03-2015 meted out by the Court of the Special Judge (SADA), South Sikkim at Namchi, vide which the Appellant was convicted and Sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 1 (one) year and a fine of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) only, under Section 9(d) of the Sikkim Anti Drugs Act, 2006 (for short SADA ) with a default clause of imprisonment for 6 (six) months; for the offence under Rule 17(1) of the Sikkim Anti Drugs Rules, 2007 (for short SADR ) read with Section 14 of the SADA, he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 (six) months and to pay a fine of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand) only, also with a default stipulation, in Sessions Trial (SADA) Case No.21 of 2014. The Sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently. 2. While assailing the impugned Judgment and Sentence, the argument advanced by the Learned Legal Aid Counsel for the A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sikkim
1. In this Writ Petition, the Petitioners pray for a Writ or Order or Direction in the nature of Mandamus, directing an independent inquiry to be conducted by the Learned District and Sessions Judge (South), at Namchi, assisted by a senior advocate and to submit a time bound report before this Court, issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding the Respondents No. 6 and 7 to pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs) only, to the Petitioners for medical expenses incurred during their treatment at Central Referral Hospital, Tadong, Issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding the Respondents No. 1, 2 and 4, to put up in all Police Outposts and Police Stations in Sikkim the guidelines as laid down by the Hon ble Apex Court, in D.K. Basu vs. State of West Bengal : (1997) 1 SCC 416 and to suspend the Respondents No. 6 and 7 during the course of inquiry. 2. The allegations raised by the Petitioners are that the Respondents No. 6 and 7 committed custodial torture of the Petitioners and by keeping P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sikkim
Sunil Kumar Sinha, C.J. 1. This Appeal is directed against the Judgment of acquittal dated 30.09.2014 passed by the Special Judge under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, East Sikkim at Gangtokin ST (POCSO) Case No. 02 of 2014 (Old ST Case No. 17 of 2013). By State of Sikkim vs. Amit Darjee (Darnal) the impugned Judgment, the respondent has been acquitted of the charges framed under Section 363 IPC and Section 3 (a) read with Section 4 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 2. The facts, briefly stated, are as under: - 2.1 The respondent and the victim (PW-2) were well known to each other. In the afternoon of 08.05.2013 the victim (PW-2), while returning to her house, met the respondent near Cooperative Stores at Sichey. The respondent suggested that they go for a walk. Accordingly they went to Devi Dhara at Sichey, where they remained together till 05.00 PM. From there, they went to Sichey Housing Colony and walked on the street till 07.00 PM and then proceeded to Modern School, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sikkim
Sunil Kumar Sinha, C.J. 1. Petitioner No. 2, Anupama Tamang, is wife of Petitioner No. 1, Arjun Tamang. They were married on 10.07.2000. They have a female child, Smriti Tamang, aged about 13 years. She is studying in 7th standard. Petitioner No. 1 is working as Driver in the Department of Sikkim Legislative Assembly. He has been allotted a Government accommodation in Syari, Gangtok. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 21.06.2014 at about 07.00 PM, Petitioner No.1 threw boiling tea on the face of Petitioner No.2, who sustained facial burns (injuries) which were simple in nature. First Information Report (FIR) was lodged by the brother of the victim, Bikash Subba, Petitioner No.3 herein. Copy of the FIR and the medical examination report have been filed as Annexures- P-I and P-III. 3. After filing of the charge-sheet, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Sikkim at Gangtok took cognizance on 22.11.2014 and ultimately charges were framed under Section 324 IPC on 17.03.2015 (Annexure ...
Tag this Judgment!