Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: Uttaranchal Page 2 of about 1,304 results (0.532 seconds)

Feb 14 2014 (HC)

Diwan Singh and Others Vs. State of Uttaranchal

Court : Uttaranchal

u.c. dhyani, j. (oral) 1) in the instant case, criminal law was set into motion, at the instance of bachi singh, who lodged an fir on 18.08.1991, at 10:00 a.m., in police station, bageshwar, the then, district almora, against three named accused persons, which was registered as case crime no. 82 of 1991, under section 304b of ipc. after the investigation, a final report was submitted. final report was rejected by learned magistrate. after further investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against all the three accused persons, namely diwan singh alias durgapal singh, chhatrapal singh and smt. ramuli devi for the offence punishable under section 306 of ipc. the case was committed to the court of sessions. when the trial began and prosecution opened its case, charge for the offences punishable under sections 498a and 304b of ipc was framed against the accused persons, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 2) pw1 narayan singh and pw2 jeewan singh were examined on behalf of the prosecution. incriminating evidence was put to the accused persons under section 313 of cr.p.c., in reply to which they said that they were falsely implicated in the case. dw1 mohan singh was examined in defence. after considering the evidence on record, learned trial court convicted accused diwan singh alias durgapal singh, chhatrapal singh and ramuli devi under section 304b of ipc. each one of the convict was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years alongwith a fine of rs. 1,000/- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 13 2014 (HC)

Saran Singh and Another Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Another

Court : Uttaranchal

u.c. dhyani, j. (oral) 1. the applicants, by means of present application under section 482 cr.p.c., seek to quash the summoning order dated 30.10.2010 as well as the entire proceedings of criminal case no. 2660 of 2010, captioned as state vs. saran singh and others, under sections 498-a, 323, 504, 506 ipc and section of the dowry prohibition act, pending before learned judicial magistrate, vikas nagar, district dehradun. 2. respondent no. 2 lodged a first information report against three named accused persons including the applicants at ps vikas nagar, which was registered as case crime no. 123 of 2010, under sections 498-a, 323, 504, 506 ipc and section of the dowry prohibition act. after the investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons. cognizance was taken on the charge-sheet and accused persons were summoned to face the trial. aggrieved against the same, present application under section 482 cr.p.c. was filed by the applicants. 3. according to the first information report, respondent no. 2 smt. sarita rana was married to prem singh rana (non-applicant) on 23.11.2005 in accordance with hindu rites and rituals. the parents of respondent no.2 gave sufficient articles according to their capacity. a lot of money was spent in the marriage. after the marriage, the husband, mother-in-law, sister-in-law and brother-in-law of the respondent no. 2 ridiculed her for want of giving sufficient dowry. they also castigated her that the articles thus given, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 13 2014 (HC)

Subhash Goyal Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Others

Court : Uttaranchal

u.c. dhyani, j. (oral) 1. the applicant, by means of present application under section 482 cr.p.c., seeks to quash the charge-sheet dated 25.02.2010, summoning order dated 14.05.2010 as well as the entire proceedings of criminal case no. 719 of 2010, titled as state vs. subhash goyal and others, under sections 147, 457, 427, 506 of ipc and section 3 (1) (x) of the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (prevention of atrocities) act, 1989 (herein after referred to as the sc / st act), pending before the judicial magistrate, rishikesh, district dehradun. 2. informant/respondent no. 2 lodged a first information report on 13.01.2010 at ps rishikesh, district dehradun, against three named accused persons including the applicant. after the investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons. cognizance was taken on the charge-sheet and the accused-applicant was summoned to face the trial. aggrieved against the same, present application under section 482 cr.p.c. was filed by the applicant. 3. according to the first information report, on 13.01.2010, at 7:15 am, accused subhash goyal, subhash agrawal, dinesh kumar and some other miscreants trespassed into the store of the informant. they threw the articles which were kept inside the store. it is also stated in the fir that a civil suit was pending before the civil court which travelled up to the high court. stay was granted by honble high court in this case. another suit was also pending in the court of civil .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 2014 (HC)

Mohan Lal and Another Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Another

Court : Uttaranchal

u.c. dhyani, j. (oral) 1) the applicants, by means of present application / petition under section 482 of cr.p.c., seek to quash the summoning order dated 18.11.2009, as also the proceedings of criminal case no. 1066 of 2009, state vs pramod bhatt and others, under sections 420, 413, 498a, 323, 504, 506 of ipc and section of the dowry prohibition act, relating to police station, raipur, pending in the court of judicial magistrate cbi, dehradun. 2) complainant (respondent no. 2 herein) lodged an fir against five accused persons, including the applicants, on 04.08.2009, at police station, raipur for the offences punishable under sections 420, 413, 498a, 323, 504, 506 of ipc. after investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons, including the applicants, under sections 420, 313, 498a, 323, 504, 506 of ipc and section of the dowry prohibition act. cognizance was taken on the said charge-sheet and accused persons were summoned to face the trial. aggrieved against the same, i.e., order dated 18.11.2009, present application under section 482 of cr.p.c. was filed by the applicants, who are, respectively, father-in-law and mother-in-law of respondent no. 2. 3) as per fir, respondent no. 2 was married to pramod bhatt alias mithlesh bhatt (non-applicant) on 16.02.2009, according to hindu rites and rituals. after the marriage it was revealed that husband of respondent no. 2 was younger to her and was only a matriculate. he did not earn the salary, as was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 2014 (HC)

Rajendra Singh Alias Vikky and Another Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Ot ...

Court : Uttaranchal

u.c. dhyani, j. (oral) 1) since both these applications under section 482 of cr.p.c. have arisen out of same fir, therefore, they are being decided by this common judgment and order, for the sake of brevity. 2) the applicants, by means of present applications / petitions under section 482 of cr.p.c., seek to set aside impugned charge-sheet dated 27.08.2010, as also the proceedings of criminal case no. 1166 of 2010, under sections 323, 504, 506, 120b of ipc and section 3(1)(x) of the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (prevention of atrocities) act, 1989, pending in the court of chief judicial magistrate, nainital. 3) an fir was lodged by informant (respondent no. 3 herein) against two named accused persons (applicants herein) on 31.07.2010, for the offences punishable under section 506 of ipc and section 3(1)(x) of the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (prevention of atrocities) act, 1989. after investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted against the applicants for the offences punishable under sections 323, 504, 506, 120b of ipc and section 3(1)(x) of the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes (prevention of atrocities) act, 1989. cognizance was taken by learned magistrate on the said charge-sheet and the accused persons were summoned to face the trial. feeling aggrieved against the same, present applications under section 482 of cr.p.c. were filed by the applicants. 4) as per fir, on 31.07.2010, at 07:00 a.m., when the informant was going to dhari alongwith one .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 10 2014 (HC)

Yogendra Singh Bhandari Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Another

Court : Uttaranchal

u.c. dhyani, j.(oral) 1) the applicant, by means of present application / petition under section 482 of cr.p.c., seeks to quash the summoning order dated 09.11.2009, charge-sheet of case crime no. 82 of 2009, relating to police station, kotwali, uttarkashi, under sections 353, 504, 506 of ipc, as also the proceedings of criminal case no. 819 of 2009, state vs yogendra singh, for the selfsame offences, pending in the court of chief judicial magistrate, uttarkashi. 2) complainant (respondent no. 2 herein) lodged an fir against the applicant, at police station, kotwali, uttarkashi on 23.09.2009, which was registered as fir no. 82 of 2009, under sections 504, 506 of ipc. cognizance was taken on said charge-sheet and accused was summoned to face the trial in respect of offences punishable under sections 353, 504, 506 of ipc. aggrieved against the same, present application under section 482 of cr.p.c. was moved. 3) as per fir, it was alleged by a police personnel, deputed at the residence of district judge, uttarkashi, that on 21.09.2009, at 08:30 p.m., one person coming from ramleela ground towards vishwanath chowk was abusing a higher officer. when the informant refrained him from doing so, accused also hurled abuses at the informant and threatened him with dire consequences. it appears that the accused was in an inebriated state. when the informant made an attempt to chase the accused, he fled away. the informant police constable knew the name of the applicant as yogendra singh .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 01 2013 (HC)

Ramesh Singh Bisht Vs. State of Uttarakhand

Court : Uttaranchal

u.c. dhyani, j. (oral) 1. a criminal complaint case was filed by the sessions judge, udham singh nagar on 23.12.2006 against ramesh singh bisht, who was a juvenile in conflict with law, before the juvenile justice board, udham singh nagar. said complaint was filed under sections 191 and 193 of ipc. 2) the reason for filing the complaint against the juvenile in conflict with law was that he gave contrary statements under section 164 of cr.p.c. and before the trial court. 3) section 191 of ipc deals with ??giving false evidence ?? and section 193 of ipc provides for punishment for false evidence. the opening sentence of section 191 of ipc is ?? ??whoever, being legally bound by an oath or by an express provision of law to state the truth ? ? ? ? .. ??. a perusal of statement of ramesh singh bisht under section 164 of cr.p.c. will indicate that when the same was recorded by the learned addl. chief judicial magistrate, oath was not administered to the deponent. section 164(5) of cr.p.c. empowers the magistrate, who records statement under section 164 of cr.p.c., to administer oath to the person whose statement is about to be recorded. section 191 of ipc is, therefore, not attracted, and, hence, there is no question of application of section 193 of ipc in the present case. 4) needless to say that the statement of witness(es) before the investigating officer or under section 164 of cr.p.c. cannot be used as evidence. it may be used, with the permission of the court, by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 19 2013 (HC)

Sanjay Garg Vs. State of Uttarakhand

Court : Uttaranchal

alok singh, j. this is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 21.09.2011 passed by special sessions judge, [n.d.p.s. act], champawat, in special sessions trial no. 5 of 2009, whereby appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under section 8/20 of the n.d.p.s. act and was sentenced rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and to pay fine of rs.1 lac, and in default of making payment of fine, to undergo additional simple imprisonment of six months. brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that on 11.12.2008, police party consisting of pw1 s.i. bhagwati prasad bisht, pw2 chowki incharge chalthi s.i. shri bachi singh bisht, constable mahendra giri, constable hira lal verma, head constable bhupendra singh and constable bhupal chandra left the police post chalthi vide report no. 10 at about 12:10 p.m. to maintain law and order and to check suspected vehicles and people; when police party reached at chalthi bridge, police informer passed on secret information to the effect that some people were carrying charas in bolero car no. hr38m-8210, if police party check them they could be arrested; having received secret information furnished by the police informer, police party tried to have independent public witness, however, none of the member of the public agreed to become independent witness; thereafter, members of the police party searched each other and believing that none of them was having contraband started waiting for the bolero car; at about 12 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 18 2013 (HC)

insaar Vs. State of Uttarakhand

Court : Uttaranchal

alok singh, j (oral). present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 30.07.2011 passed by special judge (ndps act), dehradun, in special sessions trial no. 43 of 2010 whereby appellant was held guilty for the offence punishable under section 8/15 of the ndps act and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay fine of rs.1,00,000/- and in default of making payment of fine, to undergo one year additional simple imprisonment. 2. as per the prosecution story, pw1 si madan singh, pw2 devendra singh panwar, pw3 constable ajay rautela and constable pradeep negi left the police station on 04.06.2010 vide report no.30 at 12.30 p.m. for maintaining law and order and for checking of vehicles; police party was present on bridge no.2 of shakti canal for vehicle checking, meanwhile, one white maruti car was seen, by the police party, coming from dakpathar side; having seen the police party, driver of the car stopped the car about 50 metres before and tried to take u-turn; having seen the car taking u-turn suspicion arose in the mind of police party, therefore, police party rushed towards the car and caught the driver of the car; on being asked, appellant disclosed his identity and told the police party that he was carrying poppy straw measuring about 80 kgs and he was going towards muzaffarnagar to dispose of the same, hence, having seen the police party, he was trying to run away from the site; on this, appellant was made aware about his legal .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 18 2013 (HC)

Aseem Mallik Vs. State of Uttarakhand

Court : Uttaranchal

alok singh, j. although today only bail application no. 574 of 2013 was listed for disposal, however, in view of the fact that lower court record has already been received, mr. s.r.s. gill, learned counsel for the appellant and mr. s.s. adhikari, learned brief holder for the state requested to hear the appeal finally at this stage waiving requirement of the preparation of the paper book. on the joint request of the learned counsel for the parties, requirement of preparation of the paper book was waived and appeal was taken up for hearing finally. present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 02.04.2013 and 04.04.2013 passed by additional sessions judge khatima, district udham singh nagar in session trial no. 222 of 2010, whereby appellant was found guilty for the offences punishable under sections 366 and 376 i.p.c. and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay fine of rs.500/-, and in default of making payment of fine, to undergo additional simple imprisonment of 10 days under section 366 i.p.c. ; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and to pay fine of rs.500/-, and in default of making payment of fine, to undergo additional simple imprisonment of 10 days under section 376 i.p.c. with the stipulation that both the sentences shall run concurrently. brief facts of the present case, inter alia, are that pw1 bhakto sikandar, father of the prosecutrix lodged an f.i.r. with the police station .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //