Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Rakesh Kainthla, J
Gian Chand – Appellant
Versus
State Of H.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. case background and procedural history summary. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. submission of counsels regarding conviction validity. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. scope of high court's revisional jurisdiction. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. negligence requires factual proof, not subjective opinion. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35) |
| 5. final outcome and acquittal of the petitioner. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
The present revision is directed against the judgment dated 29.05.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P. (camp at Bilaspur) (learned Appellate Court) vide which the judgment of conviction dated 30.04.2011 and order of sentence dated 04.05.2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur, H.P. (learned Trial Court) were upheld. (The 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 presented a challan before the learned Trial Court against the accused for the commission of offences pu
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
