Jharkhand Court March 2003 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.
Makhan Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-27-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)BLJR950; [2003(3)JCR148(Jhr)]
Lakshman Uraon, J.1. The appellants in all these Criminal Appeals have challenged the order of conviction and sentence dated 16-2-1991 passed by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur in Sessions Trial No. 48/42 of 1984/90 whereby and whereunder appellants in Cr. Appeal No. 60/91, namely Jitendra Singh @ Jitendra Bahadur Singh and Dhirendra Pd. Singh (since dead), were convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Sections 302/149 IPC. These two appellants were further convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years under Section 449 of the IPC. These two appellants and appellants Makhan Singh (in Cr. Appeal No. 48/91) and Hiralal Singh (in Cr. Appeal No. 59/91) were further convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years each for the offence under Section 148 of the IPC. The sentences in respect of appellants Jitendra Singh @ Jitendra Bahadur Singh and Dhirendra Pd. Singh (now dead) were ordered to run concurrently. However, all the appellants...
Haripad Rohidas Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-27-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR50(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J.1. Head Mr. A. Allam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P.K. Bhowmik, learned counsel for the respondents.2. The petitioner, in the instant case, has prayed for quashing Annexure-7, which is the order dated 21.03.1995, issued by the Senior Divisional Manager informing the petitioner that since he had failed to achieve the target on all counts, his services as Probationary Development Officer stood terminated retrospectively on and from 23.10.1994. The petitioner has also prayed for release of his salary from January 1995, till date as according to him, he has been paid his salary till December, 1994 and therefore he prays that after quashing the order of termination, he be paid his regular salary on and from January 1995 together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. According to the petitioner, an advertisement was published by the respondents for appointment of Development Officer whereafter he was called for interview and after having been selected, he wa...
Paresh Mandal Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-27-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR136(Jhr)]
Lakshman Uraon, J.1. Appellant Paresh Mandal has preferred this appeal being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 7th February, 2001 and 22nd February, 2001 respectively, passed by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad, in Sessions Trial No. 162 of 1999, whereby and whereunder, he was convicted under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for twelve years whereas other co-accused persons are acquitted for the charge under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant Manindra Nath Mandal (PW 1) in his fardbayan (Ext. 8), recorded by the Sri Pradeep Kumar, SI, Sindri (Goshala) Police Station, District Dhanbad, on 6.7.1998 at 15.30 hours at Mandal Tola, Kandra, has stated that his daughter Sumitra Mandal aged about 27 years was married with the appellant in the year, 1993. After marriage, appellant used to torture Sumitra Mandal ...
Madhuri Kumari Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: 2003(51)BLJR896; [2003(2)JCR444(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The husband of petitioner late Ramanuj Prasad was an Advocate's clerk (Munsi) of an Advocate of the Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court. On the fateful day i.e. 30th March, 2001 when her husband was coining to the Hon'ble High Court, he faced accident and died due to electric shock because of fall of live 11000 Volt wire on the road. He was taken to Gandhi Nagar Hospital by the nearby people but was declared dead. The matter was informed to Kanke Police, Ranchi on the same day when fardbeyan was recorded being Kanke PSUD Case No. 4 of 2001 elated 30th March, 2001. The dead body of the deceased was forwarded to RMCH, Ranchi for post mortem wherein after it was handed over to the family members for its last rite.2. The widow-petitioner represented before the Jharkhand State Electricity Board (JSEB for short) for payment of compensation of Rs. 10,00,000/- and for her compassionate appointment on 5th May, 2001, her husband having died because of negligence on the part of J...
Gaur Biswas and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR599(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. The petitioner's pray for issuance of an appropriate direction upon the respondents to consider their cases for payment of arrears of salary from May, 1999 and January, 2000 till date and further to consider their cases for absorption/ conversion in regular/permanent establishment from work charge establishment. 2. Petitioner's case is that they were appointed in 1980 and 1985 as toll guard and toll clerk on Muster roll in the Road Construction Department. In the year, 2000 they were transferred by the Chief Engineer, NH Section, Bihar, Patna from Biharsharif to NH Division No. 1, Dhanbad. After joining the petitioners were posted in NH Division, Dhanbad on 11.1.2001. Thereafter petitioner No. 1 filed a representation for payment of salary. It is contended that the Executive Engineer, vide letter dated 20.6.2001 requested the Superintending Engineer for allotment of funds for payment of salary to the petitioners. The petitioners filed several representations to t...
Chandra Bhushan Jha and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: [2003(2)JCR721(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The appellants filed W.P. (S) No. 4771 of 2001 before this Court seeking the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to extend the period of service of the petitioners as Professors of the University, allow them to continue till attaining the age of 62 years, for implementation of the notification issued by the University Grants Commission (UGC) and the statutory direction issued by the Central Government and for other incidental reliefs.2. According to the appellants, they were Professors and they were entitled to remain in service until their attaining the age of 62 years in view of the recommendation of the UGC issued under the University Grant Commission Act, 1956 and the State and the University who had accepted the recommendations of the UGC, were not justified in refusing to enhance the age of superannuation to 62 years from the current 60 years. The appellants could not dispute that under Section 67 of the Bihar State Universities Act, adopted in the State...
Bachcha Prasad Pathak Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR55(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This application has been preferred by the petitioner against the order, contained in Notification No. 501 (s), dated 30th January, 2003, whereby and whereunder, he has been punished in pursuance of departmental proceeding and inflicted with punishment of censure and stoppage of annual increment.2. The brief case of the petitioner is that he was suspended, vide Notification No. 2902 (S), dated 18th June, 2002 in contemplation of a departmental proceeding followed by initiation of proceeding, vide Resolution dated 10th July, 2002.Two allegations were leveled against the petitioner, namely, (i) he accepted N.S.C. as security money while granting contract in favour of one Shri Ram Nagina Tiwary, Contractor without pledging it; and (ii) though the rate quoted by two tenderers; one local (Shri Ujjawal Kumar Sinha) and an outsider (Shri Ram Nagina Nath Tiwary) were same, it was given to the outsider and not to the local Contractor. The Enquiry Officer held both the ch...
Kewal Singh Yadav Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR18(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. The case was taken up on 4th March, 2003 when the Court passed the following order : 'It is not in dispute that in respect to the State employees posted within the territory of Jharkhand, the Government of Bihar or its authorities have no jurisdiction to take disciplinary action. At best, it can refer the matter to the Stateof Jharkhand or the competent authority in the State of Jharkhand. Prima facie, it appears that the S.P. Koderma vide his order contained in Memo No. 749 dated 24th July, 2002 did not apply his mind independently, but quoted the order as passed by the S.P., Begusarai. Prima facie, he has no such jurisdiction. By way of last chance, the counsel for the State of Bihar and Jharkhand are granted two weeks' time to answer the question, failing which the case may be disposed of on the next date on the basis of averments as made in the writ petition. Place the case 'For Admission on 26th March, 2003 within twenty cases.' 2. It is not in dispu...
Haroon Rashid Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Jhar76; [2003(3)JCR370(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. This application has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 1st November, 2002 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur in Certificate Appeal No. 44/2002-03, whereby and whereunder, the petitioner was directed to deposit 40% of the certificate amount, failing which the appeal was ordered to be dismissed. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the appellate authority cannot ask the petitioner to deposit 40% of the certificate amount, final decision having not given by the Certificate Officer. 3. The brief facts of the case as pleaded suggest that a Certificate Case No. 55 (RT)/2000-01 was initiated on the requisition of the District Transport Officer, Jamshedpur for recovery of a sum of Rs. 74,958/- from the petitioner. The petitioner appeared and filed objection under Section 9 of the Bihar and Orissa Public Demand Recovery Act, 1914. During the pendency of the said certificate proceeding, the petitioner moved before...
Bhaiya Sarju Singh and ors. Vs. Bhaiya Suresh Singh and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-26-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR338(Jhr)]
ORDER1. These Interlocutory Applications are for substituting the legal representatives of deceased appellant No. 1 after deleting his name, and for condoning the delay in making the application, after setting aside the abatement, if any.2. Appellant No. 1 is said to have died on 18.8.1996, The application for substitution (at flag-'A') was filed on 24.1.2003, i.e, more than six years after the death of appellant No. 1. Obviously, the petitioners herein cannot take the plea that they were not aware of the death of their father. Hence, they have pleaded the other alternative, that they were not aware of the pendency of the Appeal. We are bound to look at the reason given, with some skepticism.3. The aforesaid applications are opposed by the learned counsel for respondents 1 and 15 by submitting that the story put forward is not true.4. Be that as it may, the instant Appeal is against a preliminary decree for partition arid is pending for quite some time before this Court. In the circums...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »