Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 409 of 2015 Maruti Mayank @ Vijay Kumar @ Vijay Pandey, Son of Sri Lakshmi Kant Sahay @ Dr. Devendra Nath Sahay, R/o Katras More, P.O. & P.S- Jhariya, Dist.- Dhanbad Permanent R/o Samir Takiya, P.O.- Samir Takiya P.S.- Civil Lines, Dist.- Gaya (Bihar) … Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI NATH VERMA For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. K. Murari, Adv. For the Opposite Party : Addl. P.P. 05/ 16.06.2015 Vide order dated 06.05.15, direction was given to the learned counsel for the petitioner to file the entire order sheet till the date of issuance of the processes under section 82 Cr. PC. Today, learned counsel prayed to the Court that besides the order sheet filed as annexure 5, there is no order sheet maintained by the court below except the order sheet maintained after passing of the order dated 06.05.15. In that circumstances, put up this case on 22.06.15 under the heading for admission. In the meantime, interim relief granted vide order dt. 06.05.15, shall continue. (R.N.Verma, J.) Smita/- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 176 of 2014 Subrata Das, Son of Late Saroj Kumar Das, R/o 10, Officer colony, P.O.- Bhelatand P.S.- Jogta Dist.- Dhanbad … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Wakil Paswan, Son of Late Brijesh Paswan, R/o 3 No. Dumri, P.O.- Jamadoba, P.S.- Jorapokhar, Dist.- Dhanbad … Opposite Parties Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI NATH VERMA For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Adv. For the Opposite Parties : Addl. P.P. 07/ 16.06.2015 As prayed for, put up this case on 14th July, 2015. In the meantime, interim relief granted vide order dt. 28.03.14, shall continue. (R.N.Verma, J.) Smita/- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 831 of 2014 1. Bidu Gope, son of Annu Gope 2. Ravi @ Pochu Gope @ Ravi Gope, son of Late Khoku Gope 3. Genda @ Genda Gope @ Leda Gope @ Ledha Gope, son of Annu Gope All residents of village Kundrilong, P.O. & P.S.- Ichagarh, Dist.- Singhbhum (West) Chaibasa … Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI NATH VERMA For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. R. C. Prasad Sah, Adv. For the Opposite Party : Addl. P.P. 06/ 16.05.2015 The revision application will be heard on limited question of sentence only and not on merit . Call for the L.C.R. from the court concerned. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that petitioner no. 3 Genda @ Genda Gope @ Leda Gope @ Ledha Gope has been convicted under section 324 of the IPC and has been sentenced to undergo RI for two years and also been convicted under section 341 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo SI for one year. It was further submitted that other accused persons Bidu Gope, Ravi @ Pochu Gope @ Ravi Gope and Khoku Gope were convicted under section 323 of the IPC and then sentenced to undergo RI for one year and also convicted under section 341 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month but during appeal filed against this judgment, one of the accused Khoku Gope, died and the conviction of the present three petitioners under sections 341 and 323 of the IPC was affirmed by the appellate court and the conviction of Genda Gope under section 324, was also affirmed. Learned counsel further submitted that the three petitioners after judgment of the appellate court surrendered in the court below on 05.05.15 and since then, they are languishing in jail custody. Learned counsel representing the State has no serious objection. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the period in custody, I am inclined to release the three petitioners on bail. Hence, during the pendency of this revision application, all the petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saraikella in Ichagarh P.S. case no. 09 of 2000 (G. R. Case No. 37 of 2000. (R.N.Verma, J.) Smita/- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 549 of 2015 Nilkanth Prasad, Son of Late Harihar Prasad, Resident of Hazaribagh Road, Beside Axis Bank, P.S.- Lower Bazar, P.O.- Lalpur Dist.- Ranchi … Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Ramesh Chandra, son of Late Harihar Prasad 2. Seema Chandra, wife of Ramesh Chandra Both residents of Hazaribagh Road, Beside Axis Bank, P.S.- Lower Chutia Bazar, Dist.- Ranchi 3. Sunny Raj, son of Nilkanth Prasad 4. Meena Prasad 5. Ekta Kumar 6. Anshu Kumari No. 4 son and 5-7 are daughters of Nilkanth Prasad, Residents of Hazaribagh Road, Beside Axis Bank, P.S.- Lower Bazar, Dist.- Ranchi 7. The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Parties Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI NATH VERMA For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. K. K. Ambastha, Adv. For the Opposite Parties : Addl. P.P. 07/ 16.06.2015 From perusal of office note dated 02.05.15, it appears that notices were have been validly served on OP No. 1 to 6. It further appears from order dated 08.01.15 that direction was given to call for LCR from the court concerned but the same has not been received as yet. Office is directed to send reminder at once and put up this case after receipt of the LCR. (R.N.Verma, J.) Smita/- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 279 of 2014 Sanjay Kumar, Son of Late Bamdeo Prasad Sinha, Resident of Sindwar Toli, Morhabadi, P.O.- RMCC P.S.- Bariatu Dist.- Ranchi … Petitioner(s) Versus Geeta Devi, Daughter of late Prakash Singh @ Sita Ram Singh, Resident of village Pararia, P.S.- Belgaganj Dist.- Gaya State - Bihar … Opposite Party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI NATH VERMA For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Kr. Sinha, Adv. For the Opposite Parties : Addl. P.P. 05/ 16.06.2015 Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to take steps for fresh notice to the sole opposite party under ordinary process and also under registered post with A.D. for which requisites etc. must be filed within two weeks, failing which, this revision application shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench. Put up this case after appearance of the sole opposite party. (R.N.Verma, J.) Smita/- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 690 of 2013 1. Ajibul Ansari, son of late Rahim Ansari 2. Hazrat Ansari, son of late Lokman Ansari 3. Manjur Ansari, son of late Mohir Ansari 4. Muslim Ansari, son of late Lokman Ansari 5. Kashim Ansari, son of late Barati Ansari, All residents of village – Bishnpur, P.O.- Barharwa, P.S.- Barharwa, Dist.- Sahebganj … Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI NATH VERMA For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party : Addl. P.P. 05/ 16.06.2015 Vide order dated 09.03.15, status report of the case was called for from the court concerned but the same has not been received. Again vide order dated 05.05.15, the court was directed to send status report but it appears from office note dated 15.06.15, that the same has not been received as yet. Call for an explanation within two weeks from the court concerned as to why directions given in order dated 09.03.15 and 05.05.15 have not been complied. Put up this case after receipt of the explanation. (R.N.Verma, J.) Smita/- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 465 of 2014 Shyam Kishore Kartik @ Shyam Kartik Keshri, Son of late Bhagwan Das Sah, R/o Jhounsiagarhi, P.O., P.S. & Dist.- Deoghar … Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party With Cr. Rev. No. 462 of 2014 Sunil Kumar Ray, Son of late Mahendra Prasad Ray, R/o village Raidiha, P.O. , P.S.- Jasidih Dist.- Deoghar … Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI NATH VERMA For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. K. P. Deo, Adv. For the Opposite Party : Addl. P.P. 05/ 16.06.2015 Vide order dated 27.04.15, direction was given to the court concerned to submit status report and it was further directed to send legible carbon copy of the Case Diary. But it appears from the office note that neither the status report has been sent to this Court nor the legible carbon copy of the Case Diary has been received. Call for an explanation within two weeks from the court concerned as to why direction given in order dated 27.04.15 has not been complied. Put up this case after receipt of the explanation. In the meantime, interim relief granted vide order dated 27.04.15 shall continue. (R.N.Verma, J.) Smita/-