Jharkhand Ranchi Court April 2011 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Sanjeev Kumar RahA. Vs. Coal India Limited and ors.
Court: Jharkhand Ranchi
Decided on: Apr-11-2011
1. This writ application has been filed for issuance of a writ directing the respondents to absorb the petitioner permanently on the post of Clerical Grade III after setting aside the order as contained in letter dated 26.4.2001 (Annexure 7) whereby Director (Personnel), C.C.L after taking into account the report submitted by the committee rejected the claim of the petitioner for absorption on the post of Clerical Grade III. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he on being selected was appointed on 27.11.1990 as Stipend Athlete in C.C.L Sports Club for a period of one year on a stipend of Rs.700/- per month. In course of time, the petitioner participated in many important athletic events and was awarded not less than 10 gold medals. Keeping in view such performances, tenure was extended time to time. In the year 1994, one R.K.Pathak Stipend Athlete/Player as well as Rashmi Shanta Baxla engaged as Stipend Athlete/Player subsequent to the petitioner were appointed on the post of Cler...
Ranchi Municipal Corporation. Vs. Bhagwati Devi and ors
Court: Jharkhand Ranchi
Decided on: Apr-11-2011
1. By Court Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. In these writ petitions, the orders of Permanent Lok Adalat, passed in P.L.A. No.758 of 2005 and others, are under challenge. By the orders, which are under challenge, the Permanent Lok Adalat has ordered that the tax imposed by the Municipal Corporation, Ranchi under Patna Municipal Corporation Act is not liable to be sustained, because there is no regular supply of water and other amenities in the localities and therefore, such tax cannot be imposed.3. The learned counsel for the petitioners, challenging the orders of the Permanent Lok Adalat, has asserted that the jurisdiction to decide the issue, pertaining to certain disputes, is delineated under Section 22-C, where the disputes can be taken to the Permanent Lok Adalat and Permanent Lok Adalat will decide those cases. The learned counsel submitted that under Section 22-A, in the definition clause (b) there are two Sub-clauses i.e. Sub clause (iii) and Sub clause (iv), which are ...
Manoranjan Prasad SinhA. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand Ranchi
Decided on: Apr-08-2011
1. Petitioner has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of the order dated 13.5.2008, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamtara, by which cognizance of the offence was taken under Section 3(1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 in Jamtara P.S. Case No.187/06 against the petitioner.2. Prosecution story in short was that the informant-opposite party No.2 presented a written report before the Jamtara police on 30.8.2006 stating therein that he was employed by the petitioner Manoranjan Prasad Sinha, Executive Engineer, R.E.O., Jamtara as a domestic help for the last one year. Informant alleged that the petitioner proposed on 20.7.2006 to arrange Rs.1,00,000/- (One lakh) within two days if he actually wanted to do construction work of Panchayat Mandap proposed by the side of his house, for purchasing essential articles related to construction and for that...
Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand ...
Court: Jharkhand Ranchi
Decided on: Apr-07-2011
1. The petitioners have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for the quashing of the entire criminal proceeding along with the F.I.R. in connection with Lalpur P.S. Case No. 67 of 2002, corresponding to G.R.No.1521 of 2002. At the initial stage by the order of this Court dated 18.05.2005, further proceeding in the said case was stayed by issuing notice to the O.P.No.2. The Opposite Party No.2 appeared and filed counter-affidavit in this case but the Opposite Party No.3, who is the informant of the case, did not appear.2. The prosecution story in short is that the O.P.No.3 (informant) lodged an F.I.R. before the Lalpur Police Station narrating, inter alia, that he had married his son Mritunjay Kumar Singh on 09.03.2002 with the O.P.No.2 Vinita Kumari. On 15.05.2002 his son Mritunjay Kumar Singh took his wife Vinita to the Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Ranchi for filling up of the examination form of B.A. Part-II where he found the accused ...
Manish Kumar and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand Ranchi
Decided on: Apr-07-2011
1. Petitioners have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of the entire criminal proceedings arising out of C.P. Case No.215 of 2010 and the order dated 14.6.2010 by which Sri S.D. Tripathi, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro having been satisfied with the materials collected in course of inquiry under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, found a prima facie offence against the petitioners under Sections 498A/323/379 of the Indian Penal Code as also under Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.2. Petitioner No.1 Manish Kumar is the husband, petitioner No.2 Dr. Rajendra Kumar Singh is the father-in-law and petitioner No.3 Mukesh Kumar is the elder brother of the husband of the complainant-opposite party No.2 Sangeeta.3. The complainant Sangeeta alleged in the C.P. Case No.215 of 2010 that she was married with the petitioner No.1 Manish Kumar on 20.4.2008 and huge amount in cash was given to the ...
Basudeo Sahu. Vs. the State of Bihar.
Court: Jharkhand Ranchi
Decided on: Apr-07-2011
1. By Court The present revision application stands preferred by the petitioner for setting aside the judgment passed in Cr. Appeal No. 02 of 2000, passed by Sri Ravindra Nath Verma, 2nd Additional Judicial Commissioner, at Khunti confirming the sentence passed by Asstt. Sessions Judge, Khunti, in S.T. No. 304 of 1991.2. The prosecution story, in short, is to the effect that on 24.04.1990 at about 8:00 a.m., a quarrel took place in between two girls. A minor boy Ranjit Sahu (P.W. 5) pacified the girls. However, one Sabita Kumari fell down, and on her complaint the father i.e. petitioner Basudeo Sahu, came to school and forcibly took Ranjit Sahu, assaulted and confined into a room of his house. Thereafter, informant Nand Lal Sahu, on next date i.e. 25.04.1990 lodged F.I.R. alleging murder of his son.3. The F.I.R. was registered under section 364/323 of I.P.C. on 25.04.1990 being Sonahatu P.S. Case No. 17 of 1990.4. It further reveals from the record that said Ranjit Sahu was recovered f...
Vijay Pratap Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand Ranchi
Decided on: Apr-07-2011
1. The petitioners have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court for quashment of the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 1649 of 2009 (T.R.No.141 of 2010) including the order dated 14.07.2010 passed by Shri Prakash Jha, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribag by which a prima facie case was found against the petitioners for the alleged offence under Sections 323/379/427/34 of the Indian Penal Code as also under Section 3(v) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and directed summons to be issued to the accused petitioners and thereafter, the case was sent to the file of the Special Judge-cum-Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribag for further proceeding under the special Act.2. The prosecution story in short was that a Complaint Case No.1649 of 2009 was lodged in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribag by the complainant-O.P.No.2 on 30.10.2009 against the petitioners alleging, inter alia, that one Heer...
Santosh Kumar. Vs. State of Jharkhand Through C.B.i., Dhanbad.
Court: Jharkhand Ranchi
Decided on: Apr-07-2011
1. Instant criminal revision has been filed by the petitioner for quashment of the order dated 24.9.2010, passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate-cum-Special Magistrate, C.B.I., Dhanbad in RC 11 A/2006(D), by which time petition filed on behalf of the petitioner for cross examination of the Investigating Officer was rejected and the evidence of the prosecution was closed.2. Prosecution story in short was that an F.I.R. was instituted against the petitioner for the alleged offence under Sections 420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code by the C.B.I. on the allegation that he dishonestly and fraudulently got his appointment letter to the post of Postal Assistant in the Postal Department, Ranchi, Circle Ranchi by producing fake and bogus certificate of Intermediate (Science) of the year 1995 showing the marks obtained as 789 out of full marks of 900 from the Bihar Intermediate Education Council, Patna. In the verification, it could be gathered that there was no candidate havi...
Chandrika Devi. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand Ranchi
Decided on: Apr-05-2011
1. This writ application is directed against the order dated 8.1.2003 passed by the Commissioner, Santhal Pargana Division, Dumka as contained in Annexure 5 whereby the order of eviction (Annexure 4) from the land in question passed by the Charge Officer against the petitioner was set aside.2. Before adverting to the submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner, the facts of the case emerging out of the record need to be noted. It appears that in Gantzers Survey Settlement Records of right, the lands of Jamabandi no.3 measuring an area of 9.93 acres comprising several plots of mouza Pirhamo had been recorded in the names of Most. Alkhi Ahrin and Siban Ahri. Since the aforesaid recorded tenants had defaulted in making payment of rent, Rent Execution Case No.1060 of 1934 was brought by Mishri Chaudhary, the then mul raiyat of the mouza which was decreed in favour of the said Mishri Chaudhary. Thereafter Raiyati Execution Case No.43 of 1935-36 was filed in the court of Sub-divisional O...
Sadhan Pal. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand Ranchi
Decided on: Apr-05-2011
1. The petitioner has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of the order dated 24.7.2008 passed by Sri. Raghubar Dayal, Addl. Sessions Judge, FTC No. III Jamshedpur by which the petition of the petitioner filed under section 146(1) which was rejected by Sri. B. Maheshwari Executive Magistrate, Dhalbhum at Jamshedpur in Miscellaneous Case No. 873 of 1999 was affirmed and Cr. Rev. No. 111 of 2008 was rejected.2. The brief fact of the case was that on the basis of the written report of Sunil Pal(now deceased) i.e the brother of the present petitioner ,a proceeding under section 107 Cr.P.C was initiated against the O.P. No.2 by the order of the SDM, Jamshedpur which was registered as Misc Case No. 873 of 1999 . The proceeding in question was related to weighing-bridge which was installed by the O.P. No.2 in front of the shop of the petitioner bearing shop No. 30/CI situated at Muri Line, Sakchi and it was stated th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »