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.

Sushma Devi and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr

Sushma Devi and ors. vs State of Jharkhand and anr

Type Court Judgment Court Jharkhand Ranchi Decided May 16, 2011
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/917641

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 Ranchi High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Cr.Rev. No. 1074 of 2010
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

[D.K.Sinha] - Limitation Act Section 5 - Extension of prescribed period in certain cases -- The instant application has been filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of 8 days delay in filing this Cr. Revision. Having been satisfied with the grounds taken and explanations made therein, delay in ...

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Limitation Act - Section 5; Indian Penal Act (IPC) - Section 498A; Dowry Prohibition Act - Section 4; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) (Cr.P.C) - Sections 482, 197

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sushma Devi and ors.

Respondent

State of Jharkhand and anr

Legal References

Acts
Limitation Act - Section 5; Indian Penal Act (IPC) - Section 498A; Dowry Prohibition Act - Section 4; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) (Cr.P.C) - Sections 482, 197

Excerpt

.....and the instant application is allowed. cr.rev. no. 1074 of 2010 this cr. rev shall be heard. koushik mishra, judicial magistrate, first class, garhwa along with the copy of the judgment recorded in cr.appeal 16 of 2010 by the sessions judge, garhwa. the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the petitioners surrendered in the court below on 10.5.2011 after the appeal was dismissed by the sessions judge, for their conviction under sections 498a of the indian penal code and section 4 of the dowry prohibition act.the other convicts rama prajapati and lachhu prajapati @ lakshu prajapati ,who were the husband and father-in-law of the complainant sabita devi respectively, have been acquitted by this court in cr.rev. sd (d.k.sinha, j) in the high court of jharkhand, ranchi. cr.m.p. no. 359 of 2011 suresh prasad . .....................petitioner versus state of jharkhand &anr ........................................... opp. parties coram :- hon'ble mr. justice d.k. sinha for the petitioner :- mr.yogesh modi for the state :- a.p.p. sd in the high court of jharkhand, ranchi. cr.m.p. no. 749 of 2011 anil kumar singh & ors. . .....................petitioners versus state of jharkhand ........................................... opp. party coram :- hon'ble mr. justice d.k. sinha 2/16.5.2011 mr. s.n. prasad, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks adjournment for filing appropriate documents in support of the contention that the prosecution of junior engineer for sanction under section 197 cr.p.c is required as they are public servants in terms of the definition of the "public servants" contained in the indian penal code. put up this case on 9th june, 2011......the petitioners sushma devi,lilawati devi and ramchandra prajapatis are directed to be released, during pendency of this cr.rev, on executing bail bond of rs. 10,000/-(rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the trial magistrate, garhwa with the conditions that the bailors would be their near relatives and they would cooperate in disposal of this cr.rev, failing to which appropriate order shall be passed for vacating their ad-interim bail. .5. let this order be communicated to the court concerned through fax at the cost there being borne by the petitioners.sd (d.k.sinha, j) in the high court of jharkhand, ranchi.cr.m.p. no. 359 of 2011suresh prasad . .....................petitioner versusstate of jharkhand &anr; ........................................... opp. partiescoram :- hon'ble mr. justice d.k. sinhafor the petitioner :- mr.yogesh modi for the state :- a.p.p.1. 5/16.5.2011 the instant petition has been filed under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure for restoration of w.p.(cr.) 420 of 2009 which was dismissed for default on 14.1.2011 on the ground of non-appearance of the counsel on that date when the case was called out.2. having been satisfied with the grounds taken and explanation made therein this petition is allowed and w.p.(cr.)no. 420 of 2009 is directed to be restored to its original file.(d.k.sinha, j)sdin the high court of jharkhand, ranchi.cr.m.p. no. 749 of 2011anil kumar singh & ors. . .....................petitioners versusstate of jharkhand ........................................... opp. partycoram :- hon'ble mr. justice d.k. sinhafor the petitioner :- mr.s.n. prasad for the state :- a.p.p.1. 2/16.5.2011 mr. s.n. prasad, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks adjournment for filing appropriate documents in support of the contention that the prosecution of junior engineer for sanction under section 197 cr.p.c is required as they are public servants in terms of the.....

Full Judgment

1. The instant application has been filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of 8 days delay in filing this Cr. Revision. Having been satisfied with the grounds taken and explanations made therein , delay in filing this Cr. Revision is condoned and the instant application is allowed. I.A. No. 2673 of 2010 stands disposed of.

Cr.Rev. No. 1074 of 2010

This Cr. Rev shall be heard.

2. Call for the L.C.R of C-50/2002 corresponding to Tr. No. 41 of 2010 from the court of Sri. Koushik Mishra, Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Garhwa along with the copy of the judgment recorded in Cr.Appeal 16 of 2010 by the Sessions Judge, Garhwa.

3. Put up this case after four weeks.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the petitioners surrendered in the court below on 10.5.2011 after the appeal was dismissed by the Sessions Judge, for their conviction under sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.The other convicts Rama Prajapati and Lachhu Prajapati @ Lakshu Prajapati ,who were the husband and father-in-law of the complainant Sabita Devi respectively, have been acquitted by this Court in Cr.Rev. No. 843 of 2010 on 8.10. 2010 on the basis of the compromise and relying upon B.S. Joshi'case reported in (2003) 4 S.C.C. 675.The complainant is inclined to compromise with this petitioners and hence their ad-interim bail may be considered. The learned counsel further submitted that they were all along on bail during trial and in appeal and never misused the privilege . In the circumstances, the petitioners Sushma Devi,Lilawati Devi and Ramchandra Prajapatis are directed to be released, during pendency of this Cr.Rev, on executing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Trial Magistrate, Garhwa with the conditions that the bailors would be their near relatives and they would cooperate in disposal of this Cr.Rev, failing to which appropriate order shall be passed for vacating their ad-interim bail. .

5. Let this order be communicated to the court concerned through Fax at the cost there being borne by the petitioners.

SD (D.K.Sinha, J) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI.

Cr.M.P. No. 359 of 2011

Suresh Prasad . .....................Petitioner Versus

State of Jharkhand &Anr; ........................................... Opp. Parties

CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. SINHA

For the Petitioner :- Mr.Yogesh MOdi For the State :- A.P.P.

1. 5/16.5.2011 The instant petition has been filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for restoration of W.P.(Cr.) 420 of 2009 which was dismissed for default on 14.1.2011 on the ground of non-appearance of the counsel on that date when the case was called out.

2. Having been satisfied with the grounds taken and explanation made therein this petition is allowed and W.P.(Cr.)No. 420 of 2009 is directed to be restored to its original file.

(D.K.Sinha, J)

SD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI.

Cr.M.P. No. 749 of 2011

Anil Kumar Singh & Ors. . .....................Petitioners Versus

State of Jharkhand ........................................... Opp. Party

CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K. SINHA

For the Petitioner :- Mr.S.N. Prasad For the State :- A.P.P.

1. 2/16.5.2011 Mr. S.N. Prasad, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks adjournment for filing appropriate documents in support of the contention that the prosecution of Junior Engineer for sanction under section 197 Cr.P.C is required as they are public servants in terms of the definition of the "public servants" contained in the Indian Penal Code.

2. Put up this case on 9th June, 2011.

3. In the meantime, there shall be stay of further proceeding of Khunti P.S. Case No. 60 of 2000 corresponding to G.R. No. 241 of 2000 pending in the court of ACJM Khunti against the petitioners till next date. (D.K.Sinha, J)

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial