Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Ramdev Yadav and anr Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Ramdev Yadav and anr vs The State of Jharkhand

Type Court Judgment Court Jharkhand Decided Aug 31, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1026222

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Jharkhand High Court
Decided On
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ramdev Yadav and anr

Respondent

The State of Jharkhand

Excerpt

in the high court of jharkhand, ranchi b.a. no. 6451 o”1. ramdev yadav 2.chigo yadav ..... petitioner(s) versus the state of jharkhand . opp. party(s) coram: honble mr. justice r. r. prasad for the petitioner(s) : m/s k. p. deo, aashish kumar, advocates. for the state : mr. anand kr. pandey, advocate. ----- 02 /31.08.2013. heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel for the state. the petitioner are accused in a case instituted under sections 302 /34.of the indian penal code. learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners and one another person had been granted anticipatory bail on a condition of deposit of rs.50,000/-, but since such amount was not deposited, the petitioners were taken into custody when the petitioners did surrender in the court and that the police, after investigation, did not find the case to be true under sections 302 /34 of the indian penal code rather did find the case under sections 304, 337, 323, 504, 147 of the indian penal code and under the circumstances, the petitioners be admitted to bail. regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, the above-named petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned s.d.j.m., godda, in connection with mahgama p.s. case no.73 of 2008, corresponding to g.r. no.742 of 2008. (r. r. prasad, j.) sandeep/

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI B.A. No. 6451 o”

1. Ramdev Yadav 2.Chigo Yadav ..... Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opp. Party(s) CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD For the Petitioner(s) : M/s K. P. Deo, Aashish Kumar, Advocates. For the State : Mr. Anand Kr. Pandey, Advocate. ----- 02 /31.08.2013. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. The petitioner are accused in a case instituted under Sections 302 /34.of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners and one another person had been granted anticipatory bail on a condition of deposit of Rs.50,000/-, but since such amount was not deposited, the petitioners were taken into custody when the petitioners did surrender in the court and that the Police, after investigation, did not find the case to be true under Sections 302 /34 of the Indian Penal Code rather did find the case under Sections 304, 337, 323, 504, 147 of the Indian Penal Code and under the circumstances, the petitioners be admitted to bail. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, the above-named petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M., Godda, in connection with Mahgama P.S. Case No.73 of 2008, corresponding to G.R. No.742 of 2008. (R. R. Prasad, J.) Sandeep/

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial