Latest news with #HimachalPradeshHighCourt
Hans India
20 hours ago
- Hans India
Teacher booked under POCSO Act dismissed
Shimla: The Himachal Pradesh government dismissed a Physics teacher from service for alleged molestation of girl students, citing grave misconduct and violation of provisions under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. Rakesh Kumar, presently posted at Government Senior Secondary School in Solan district, was served dismissal orders by the director of school education. During his previous posting in Paonta Sahib in Sirmaur district, Kumar was accused of misbehaving with and molesting girl students. An FIR was registered against him on May 9, 2023, under Section 354A (penalizes sexual harass-ment) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 11 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, officials said. A departmental inquiry under the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, was initiated on September 6, 2023 and entrusted to Vaibhav Kumar Shukla, Principal of Gov-ernment Degree College, Paonta Sahib. Kumar had approached the Himachal Pradesh High Court seeking quashing of the charge sheet or a stay on the departmental proceedings until the conclusion of the criminal trial. However, the court dismissed the plea, observing that there was no ground to stay the inquiry under the given circum-stances. The inquiry officer, in his report, stated that the documents submitted by Kumar to contest the charges appeared questionable in authenticity and failed to adequately disprove the allegations. The report also noted that Kumar remained in judicial custody from May 9 to June 3, 2023, indi-cating the serious nature of the case. 'Taking into account the gravity of the misconduct, the nature of allegations involving moral turpi-tude, and the imperative need to ensure student safety, I am of the considered opinion that Rakesh Kumar is not fit to be retained in government service,' the inquiry officer concluded.
Indian Express
2 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Gangrape Case against Badoli: Do not disclose name of complainant in public domain, e-court portal: HC
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has directed that the name of the complainant woman in a gangrape case against Haryana BJP president Mohan Lal Badoli and and Haryanvi singer Jai Bhagwan, must not be disclosed in public domain, including the e-court portal. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel passed the order Monday during the resumed hearing on a petition filed by Badoli seeking to restrain the woman from public statements about the BJP leader even as trial court in Solan is hearing the matter. During the hearing, the counsel for the woman raised objection over the disclosure of her name in the petition filed by Badoli, which was later also put up e-court portal of the high court. Accepting the objection, the court said, '…the petitioner has disclosed the name of the victim in the memo of parties, which is completely wrong and the name of the victim cannot be disclosed. He (the woman's counsel) further submits that at this stage an order be passed that the name of the victim be not reflected in the Online e-court Portal. Ordered accordingly'. Senior Advocate Ankush Dass Sood, assisted by Advocates Virbahadur Verma, Gaurav Choudhary, Ankit Dhiman, and Mukul Sharma appeared for the petitioner. The state was represented by Deputy Advocate General Rahul Thakur. The parties sought a period of four weeks for filing their replies, which was granted. The matter has now been listed for hearing on September 5, 2025, and the interim order will continue to remain in force until then. During the previous hearing on July 22, the court had refrained the woman from making any public statements beyond what has already been stated in judicial proceedings. At the time. Justice Goel had issued notices to the Himachal Pradesh Police, the Solan superintendent of police (SP), and two other respondents, directing them to submit their replies on July 28. On July 15, the district and sessions court in Solan allowed a revision petition challenging an earlier order of the Kasauli court, which had accepted a cancellation report filed by Kasauli police in the gang rape case against Badoli and Mittal. The sessions court also directed the complainant to appear before the Kasauli court on July 30. The FIR against Badoli and Mittal was registered on December 13, 2024, under sections 376(D) (gang rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code. The cancellation report, citing a lack of sufficient evidence, had been accepted by the Kasauli court on March 12, prompting the complainant to file a revision petition before the Solan court.
Time of India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Supreme Court stays HC order on axing apple orchards on encroached forest land
Shimla: The Supreme Court on Monday stayed Himachal Pradesh High Court's July 2 order giving nod to axing of all apple orchards on encroached forest land in the state. The bench, comprising Chief Justice BR Gavai, Justice Vinod Chandran, and Justice NV Anjaria, however, allowed the state govt to auction the apple crop by taking over the encroached forest land without felling the fruit trees. Hearing a special leave petition moved by former deputy mayor of Shimla, Tikender Singh Panwar, and advocate Rajiv Rai, to prevent irreversible ecological and socio-economic harm in the ecologically fragile Himalayan state, the apex court put the state govt on notice along with other respondents to file a reply by Sep 16. After Himachal advocate general Anup Kumar Rattan submitted that the state govt has also challenged the high court orders, but its special leave petition was not listed on Monday, the apex court directed that both cases be tagged together. The bench was informed that implementing the HC order will lead to destroying 50,000 to one lakh apple trees across the state, out of which around 5,000 have already been brought down in Shimla district, petitioner's counsel Subhash Chandran KR told TOI. Such large-scale tree felling, particularly during the monsoon season, significantly heightens the risk of landslides and soil erosion in Himachal Pradesh, a region known for its seismic activity and ecological sensitivity, the petitioners stated. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Treatment That Might Help You Against Knee Pain Knee pain | search ads Find Now Undo It was highlighted that apple orchards, far from being mere encroachments, contribute to soil stability, provide habitats for local wildlife, and form the backbone of the state's economy, supporting the livelihoods of thousands of farmers. They further mentioned that the destruction of these orchards threatened not only environmental stability but also the fundamental right to livelihood enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution. Instead of felling the trees, the petitioners proposed sustainable alternatives such as state acquisition of orchards for public purposes, auctioning of fruit and timber, or utilisation of resources for farmer cooperatives or disaster relief initiatives. The petitioners also pointed out that the high court order disregarded the Supreme Court precedents that stress on the state's obligation to safeguard citizens' livelihoods, particularly in regions where agriculture is a primary economic activity. MSID:: 122956582 413 |
Hindustan Times
5 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
SC to hear on Jul 28 ex-Shimla dy mayor's plea against HC order over removal of apple orchards
New Delhi, The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear on Monday a plea of the former deputy mayor of Shimla challenging the Himachal Pradesh High Court order that directed the government to remove fruit-bearing apple orchards from encroached forest lands. SC to hear on Jul 28 ex-Shimla dy mayor's plea against HC order over removal of apple orchards A bench of Chief Justice B R Gavai and Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria will hear the plea of former deputy mayor Tikender Singh Panwar and activist advocate Rajiv Rai. The plea said that the high court, in its July 2 order, directed the forest department to remove the apple orchards and to plant forest species in their place, with costs to be recovered from encroachers as arrears of land revenue. "The petitioners submit that the said order is arbitrary, disproportionate and violative of constitutional, statutory and environmental principles, thereby necessitating the intervention of the Supreme Court to prevent irreversible ecological and socio-economic harm in the ecologically fragile state of Himachal Pradesh," the plea said. It said such large-scale tree-felling, particularly during the monsoon season, significantly heightens the risk of landslides and soil erosion in Himachal Pradesh, a region characterised by its seismic activity and ecological sensitivity. "Apple orchards, far from being mere encroachments, contribute to soil stability, provide habitats for local wildlife and form the backbone of the state's economy, supporting the livelihoods of thousands of farmers," the plea said. Panwar submitted that the high court's order, which mandates the blanket removal of apple trees without conducting a comprehensive Environmental Impact Assessment , is arbitrary and contravenes the precautionary principle, a cornerstone of environmental jurisprudence. The plea added that the destruction of these orchards threatens not only environmental stability but also the fundamental right to livelihood enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution. "The high court's order lacked the requisite EIA to assess its environmental and socio-economic impacts, thereby violating the principles of reasonableness and proportionality as elucidated in cases such as Coimbatore District Central Co-operative Bank. "The felling of apple trees during the monsoon season exacerbates ecological risks, including landslides and soil erosion, contradicting judicial mandates for environmental assessments as seen in T N Godavarman Thirumulpad vs. Union of India," the petitioners said. They said the economic ramifications are equally severe, as apple cultivation is a vital component of Himachal Pradesh's economy, and its destruction threatens the livelihoods of small-scale farmers, thereby infringing upon their constitutional right to life and livelihood. "In lieu of destructive felling, the petitioners propose sustainable alternatives, such as state acquisition of orchards for public purposes, auctioning of fruit and timber, or utilisation of resources for farmer cooperatives or disaster relief initiatives. These measures would align with the principles of sustainable development, balancing environmental conservation with economic imperatives," the plea said. Panwar said as of July 18, reports indicate that over 3,800 apple trees have been felled in areas like Chaithla, Kotgarh and Rohru, with plans to remove up to 50,000 trees across the state. "The enforcement of this order, as evidenced in public reports, led to the destruction of fully fruit-laden apple trees, evoking widespread public distress and criticism," he submitted in his plea. Himachal Pradesh Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu on July 17 said the state government is not in favour of felling apple-laden trees from encroached forest land and that it should be given time to auction the produce. He had said a meeting will be convened with the horticulture minister and other senior officers soon to explore the legal aspects of this issue and the basis on which the Supreme Court will be approached. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Indian Express
6 days ago
- Politics
- Indian Express
Himachal Pradesh HC restrains woman complainant in gang rape case from making statements beyond judicial order
A single-judge bench of the Himachal Pradesh High Court has instructed the complainant woman in the alleged gang rape case against Haryana BJP president Mohan Lal Badoli to refrain from making any public statements beyond what has already been stated in judicial proceedings. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, while hearing a petition filed by Badoli, also issued notices to the Himachal Pradesh Police, the Solan superintendent of police (SP), and two other respondents, directing them to submit their replies by the next date of hearing, which has been fixed for July 28. Issuing the directions on July 22, the court stated, 'Notice in above terms. In the interregnum, though the court is not restraining respondent number 5 (complainant against the petitioner), in terms of the prayers made in the application praying for interim relief, however, it is ordered that till the next date of hearing, respondent number-5 shall refrain from making any statements beyond the judicial orders that have been passed by the court.' Advocate Veer Bahadur Verma, representing Badoli, said, 'We approached the High Court seeking relief as the complainant continued to make damaging public statements after every minor development in the lower court. We are not opposed to the legal process, but we were concerned about the petitioner's reputation. The court accepted our plea, and the next hearing has been scheduled for Monday.' Notices on behalf of the State of Himachal Pradesh and SP Solan were accepted by Additional Advocate General Pushpinder Jaswal. On July 15, the district and sessions court in Solan allowed a revision petition challenging an earlier order of the Kasauli court, which had accepted a cancellation report filed by Kasauli police in the gang rape case against Badoli and singer Jai Bhagwan alias Rocky Mittal. The sessions court also directed the complainant to appear before the Kasauli court on July 30. The FIR against Badoli and Mittal was registered on December 13, 2024, under sections 376(D) (gang rape) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code. The cancellation report, citing a lack of sufficient evidence, had been accepted by the Kasauli court on March 12, prompting the complainant to file a revision petition before the Solan court.
