Court on its own motion v. State of H.P. & Anr 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 6

Kusum Bali Vs State of HP & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 7

Divisional Manager, H.P. State Forest Development Corporation Ltd Vs Prem Lal 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 8

Naresh Kumar Vs Trilok Chand 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 9

Pankaj Kumar Lakhanpal & ors Vs State of HP & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 10

Judgments/Orders:

Can Sessions Court Sit Anywhere Else Than Its Court Premises To Conduct Trial? Himachal Pradesh High Court Explains

Case Title: Court on its own motion v. State of H.P. & Anr.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 6

While answering a reference made by an Additional District & Sessions Judge, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has clarified that a Sessions Judge can sit at any place other than his Court premises, within his Sessions division, to record evidence and conduct a trial.

Referring to Section 9(6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Single Judge Bench of Justice Satyen Vaidya stated:

“The learned Additional Sessions Judge exercises the jurisdiction vested in the Court of Session. As per sub section (6) of Section 9 quoted above, a Court of Session is authorized to hold its sittings at any place in the Sessions Division other than the place specified by the High Court by notification, in case, the Court of Session is of opinion that it will tend to the general convenience of the parties and the witnesses.”

Himachal Pradesh High Court Bans Cutting Of Hills Without Prior Permission From Town And Country Planning Director

Case Title: Kusum Bali Vs State of HP & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 7

The Himachal Pradesh High Court directed the State government to frame a policy for conservation, preservation and cutting of hills in consultation with the Department of Environment, Science and Technology and such other departments, as may be necessary, within two months.

The direction came from a bench comprising then Chief Justice A A Sayed and Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua while hearing a Public Interest Litigation in terms of which the petitioner had highlighted the indiscriminate and haphazard constructions on either side of the road stretching an area of 6 Kilometers between Village Kheel Jhalsi to Village Kainthari (including Village Koro) in District Solan.

Person Ineligible To Act As Arbitrator U/s 12(5) Cannot Appoint Another Arbitrator For Determining The Dispute: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case Title: Divisional Manager, H.P. State Forest Development Corporation Ltd Vs Prem Lal

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 8

The Himachal Pradesh High Court ruled that any person who becomes ineligible to act as an Arbitrator in terms of Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act cannot appoint/nominate another Arbitrator for determining the dispute.

Section 12(5) provides that notwithstanding any prior agreement to the contrary, any person whose relationship with the parties or counsel or the subject-matter of the dispute falls under any of the categories specified in the Seventh Schedule, shall be ineligible to be appointed as an arbitrator.

"Any appointment of other person nominated by such person as an Arbitrator for determining the dispute arising under the arbitration agreement is void ab initio. The proceedings so conducted will be non est. The awards passed by such person, if any, are also void," it said.

[S.147 Negotiable Instruments Act] Offence Can Be Compounded Post-Conviction For Cheque Dishonour: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case Title: Naresh Kumar Vs Trilok Chand.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 9

The Himachal Pradesh High Court observed that courts while exercising power under Section 147 (Offences To Be Compoundable) of the Negotiable Instrument Act are sufficiently empowered to proceed to compound an offence, even in cases where accused stands convicted.

Relying on the apex court judgment in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H. (2010), the bench said that notwithstanding the fact that a judgment of conviction and order of sentence recorded by trial Court has been further upheld by this Court but Section 147 of the Act sufficiently empowers this Court to compound the offence after recording of conviction and hence there appears to be no impediment in accepting the prayer made in the application.

State Cannot Deny Pay Parity Of Veterinarians With Medicos Just Because They Deal With Animals: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case Title: Pankaj Kumar Lakhanpal & ors Vs State of HP & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 10

Observing that Veterinary Doctors are at par with Medical Doctors, the Himachal Pradesh High Court ruled that State cannot deny the grant of 4-tier pay scale to the Veterinary Officers on a flimsy ground, that they are dealing with animals and the doctors serving in the Health and Family Welfare Department are dealing with humans.