REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

PURAN LAL Appellant

V/S

STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

LANCASER MOTOR CO. (LONDON) LTD. V. BREMTH LTD. [REFERRED TO]
SRINIWAS RAM KUMAR V. MAHABIR PRASAD [REFERRED TO]
JAGAT NARAYAN JHA V. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA V. PADMANABHAN NAIR [REFERRED TO]
N. RAGHAVENDER V. STATE OF A.P. [REFERRED TO]
SHREEKANTIAH RAMAYYA MUNIPALLI VS. STATE OF BOMBAY [REFERRED TO]
AMRIK SINGH VS. STATE OF PEPSU [REFERRED TO]
HARIHAR PRASAD VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
K CH PRASAD VS. J VANALATHA DEVI [REFERRED TO]
LAKSHMANSINGH HIMATSINGH VAGHELA VS. NARESH KUMAR CHANDRASHANKER JAH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. SYNTHETICS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
DIRECTOR OF INSPECTION AND AUDIT VS. C L SUBRAMANIAM [REFERRED TO]
SHAMBHOO NATH MISRA VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. V PADMNABHAN NAIR [REFERRED TO]
ARNIT DAS VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
A ONE GRANITES VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
BHAVNAGAR UNIVERSITY VS. PALITANA SUGAR MILL PRIVATE LIMITED [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. M P GUPTA [REFERRED TO]
VINOD KUMAR VS. COMMISSIONER [REFERRED TO]
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK VS. R L VAID [REFERRED TO]
CEMENT CORPN OF INDIA VS. PURYA [REFERRED TO]
KALYAN CHANDRA SARKAR VS. RAJESH RANJAN [REFERRED TO]
BHARAT FORGE CO LTD VS. UTTAM MANOHAR NAKATE [REFERRED TO]
ZEE TELEFILMS LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. KARANVIR [REFERRED TO]
MUSTAFIKHAN VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
MANJU RAM KALITA VS. STATE OF ASSAM [REFERRED TO]
SADHUPATI NAGESWARA RAO VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
RAJKUMAR ANANDILAL VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
MALKEET SINGH GILL VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision is directed against the judgment dtd. 26/12/2012, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kinnaur Sessions Division at Rampur Bushahr, vide which the appeal filed by the present petitioner (accused before the learned Trial Court) was partly dismissed and the judgment and order dtd. 14/5/2007, convicting the accused for the commission of an offence punishable under Sec. 409 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.5000.00 and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for about 3 months was upheld (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present revision are that the police filed a charge sheet against the accused before the learned Trial Court for the commission of offences punishable under Ss. 409 and 420 of IPC. It was asserted that an amount of Rs.1,78,000.00 was awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) in M.A.C case No. 22 of 1996, decided on 12/1/1998, in favour of Jitwar Singh Negi, Domla Devi and Chander Kant. Respondent No.2, National Insurance Company deposited an amount of Rs.1,66,814.00 with the Tribunal. Rs.25,000.00were ordered to be released to Dolma and Rs.8,363.00 each was ordered to be released to Jitwar Singh Negi and Chander Kant. The remaining amount of Rs.1,25,000.00 was ordered to be invested in Kisan Vikas Patras in the name of the petitioners. Accused Puran Raj was posted as a Daftari in MACT Rampur. He was temporarily discharging his duties as Naib Nazir on the date of the incident.

(3.) Sh. Shamsher Singh (PW-17) was posted as District and Sessions Judge Kinnuar, Sessions Division at Rampur Bushahr. He made a written complaint (Ext. PW16/A) to Dy. S.P Rampur. F.I.R. (Ext.PW16/B) was registered at the Police Station.

Click here to view full judgment.

PURAN LAL Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address