IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

Cr. Revision No.366 of 2014

Reserved on: 18.11.2025

Date of Decision: 16.12.2025

Harminder Singh …Petitioner

Versus

State of H.P. .... Respondent

Coram

Hon’ble Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?¹ No.

For the Petitioner : M/s Y.K. Thakur, Bhanu Verma

and Ritik Prashar, Advocates.

For the Respondent/ : Mr. Jitender K. Sharma,

State Additional Advocate General.

Rakesh Kainthla, Judge

g The present revision is directed against the

ijudgment dated 22.09.2014 passed by learned Additional

Sessions Judge, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P. (Camp at Bilsapur) (learned Appellate Court), vide which the judgment of conviction dated 06.09.2013 and order of sentence dated 07.09.2013 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, H.P. (learned Trial Court) were upheld. (Parties shall

. Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)

2. Briefly stated, the facts leading to the present revision are that the police filed a challan before the learned Trial Court against the accused forf the c