Jharkhand Court May 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.
B.P. Singh @ Brij Pal Singh and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand Through C. ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-07-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR77(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J. 1. Heard. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Special Judge, C.B.I. could not have taken cognizance of the offences under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code on the basis of the charge-sheet submitted by the C.B.I. It was only the Special Judicial Magistrate, who was. empowered to Lake cognizance under the provisions of the Penal Code.2. It is not a simple case in which the charge-sheet was submitted only under Sections 120B/420/406/407 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code but in fact after investigation, the C.B.I. has submitted charge-sheet under the aforesaid sections of the Indian Penal Code but also under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1) (c) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act against several accused persons including the officials who are public servants of different Government Departments. 3. It is only because the sanction for prosecution was awaited against the petitioners who are the officials of BPC...
Keshav Kumar Roy Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-07-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3656; [2003(3)JCR78(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The prayer of the petitioner in this application is for quashing the order dated 22.1.2003 passed by the District and Sessions Judge, Deoghar in Criminal Revision No. 53 of 2002 whereby the learned Sessions Judge allowed the said revision application and set aside the order dated 29.1.2002 taking cognizancepassed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar under Sections 420/120B of the Indian Penal Code against the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3.2. The petitioner, who is the complainant, filed complaint case being PCR case No. 32 of 2002 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar against the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3. It was alleged in the complaint petition that on being misrepresented by the opposite party No. 2 that they were exclusive owner of the land measuring 2600 square fit of plot No. 407 situated at Mauza Shyamganj in the town of Deoghar. The petitioner approached the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 and offered to purchase the said land. The accused persons showed h...
Mostt. Chanda Devi Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-07-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)BLJR1228; [2003(3)JCR489(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This is an application filed by the mother of the deceased employee seeking review of the order dated 4-3-2003 passed in W.P. (S) No. 1525/ 2002. The aforesaid writ petition was filed by Smt. Savitri Devi, the widow of the deceased late Arun Kumar Gupta. She impleaded the authorities of the respondent State of Jharkhand and sought direction for the release of the retiral benefits.2. This Court by order-dated 4-3-2002 disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the District Provident Fund Officer, gumla to see that the provident fund amount legally payable to the petitioner, if not paid, is paid to her, So far other claims are concerned, petitioner was directed to file representation before the Deputy Commissioner, Gumla with a copy to the Civil Surgeon, Gumla who shall look into the matter and see that all admitted death-cum-retiral dues legally payable to_the petitioner is paid to her within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.3...
Bahadur Mahto Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Limited and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-07-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR591(Jhr)]
1. Appellant was working in Barora Colliery of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited as Operator. In the year 1966 he was appointed in a private Colliery. In the statutory Form-B register his date of birth was recorded as 18.4.1943 at the time of his appointment. In token of acceptance of the entries made in the said Form-B register, he had affixed his left thumb impression thereon. Normally details mentioned in the Form-B register are final and conclusive and are binding on the parties. The said workman came out with a case that as per entry of his date of birth as 18.2.1947 in the Identity Card, his date of birth be corrected in the statutory Form-B register accordingly. The Management of the Colliery served letter dated14/16.11.2002 informing that he superannuates with effect from 30.4.2003. It wasbased on the entry relating to his date ofbirth in the Form-B register. As such hefiled WP (S' No. 6363 of 2002 in this Courtfor quashing the order of his superannuation on 30.4.2003, as he was ...
Sukar Sao and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-07-2003
Reported in: II(2003)DMC531; [2003(3)JCR325(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal has been directed by the appellant named above against the judgment and order dated 23.4.2002 passed in Sessions Trial No. 99 of the 1998 by Shri Anil Kumar Choudhary, Additional Sessions Judge, Bermo and Tenughat, whereby and whereunder all the appellants were found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and they were convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life. However, they were acquitted for the offence punishable under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 4ue to legal infirmity i.e., want of sanction of the prescribed authority as well as the demand of dowry not being the consideration of marriage. Co-accused Raju Sao was found not guilty of all the charges aforesaid and he was acquitted.2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the fardbeyan (Ext. 1) of PW 2, Manoj Kumar Sao, the cousin brother of Brijbala Devi, the deceased of this case, recorded by Shri Upendra Kumar Ram, S...
T.K. Mishra Vs. Bokaro Steel Plant and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-07-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR590(Jhr)]
1. The appellant was petitioner in CWJC No. 3656 of 1998(R), which was dismissed by learned Single Judge on 6.11.2000 on the ground that no case for interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was made out, One V.S. Tiwary claimed to have been employed with Bokaro Steel City, Central Consumers Co-operative Society Limited as Sales-cum-Weighman. It was detected that his appointment was illegal and was accordingly terminated by order dated 24.2.1997 passed by Additional Registrar of Co-operative Societies with immediate effect. A direction was also given to recover the salary paid to him during the period of his service from the Managing Committee, which had illegally appointed him. CWJC No. 988 of 1997(R) is pending before this Court against the termination order, wherein by interim order dated 28.10.1997 this Court granted stay in regard to recovery of salary paid to the terminated employee. In the meantime, the Co-operative Society by letter dated 28.5.1997 informed th...
Shyam Sundar and anr. Vs. Parbati Devi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-07-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR586(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. This second appeal filed by the defendants/appellants is directed against the judgment and decree dated 19.12.1988 passed by the 1st Additional District Judge, Giridih in Title Appeal No. 13/1977 whereby he has dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment and decree dated 12.7.1977 passed by Munsif Giridih in Title Suit No. 17/76. 2. The appeal was admitted for hearing on the following substantial question of law : 'Whether in absence of the heirs of Sheonath Mukherjee, one of the parties in whose favour the appellant-defendants had agreed to reconvey the property, the suit could have been decreed for the whole of the property. 3. The facts of the case lie in a narrow campass. 4. Two persons namely, Shambhunath Mukherjee and Sheonath Mukherjee who were the owners of the suit property sold it to the defendants for a consideration of Rs. 1,000/- and Rs. 3,500/- through two separate sale deeds dated 22.6.1973 and put them in possession of the same. On the same day defe...
Bokaro Ispat Kamgar Union Vs. the Chairman, Sail Ispat Bhawan and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-07-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR663(Jhr)]
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J. 1. The Bokaro Steel Ltd. was incorporated in the year 1961 under Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956 for establishing a steel plant in the undivided State of Bihar. A large number of engineering, managerial, legal and clerical staff were employed and other workers were engaged. Even at the project stage in the year 1962, the employees of the establishment formed a co-operative society known as the 'Bokaro Steel Product Employees Co-operative Consumers Store, Ltd.. It was subsequently registered under the Bihar Co-operative Societies Act and its registration no was BGS 1/73. The society was registered with the object of (sic) the common interest of its members and for providing various facilities of to the members of the Constitution of the Co-operative Society was subsequently changed by amending the bye-laws and it came to be known as The Bokaro Steel City Central Consumers Co-operative Stores Ltd.' (hereinafter referred to as the 'Society). The society i...
ShirIn Fazalbhoy and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-07-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1916
ORDERDeoki Nandan Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') for quashing Complaint Case No. 570 of 1998 and also for any consequential orders and the order dated 24-11-1998, whereby and whereunder Sri S.S. Rao, Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi took cognizance of the offence under Sections 384, 420, 403, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that accused Nos. 1 and 2 claim to be the trustee of Abdullah Fazalbhoy Charities Trust of Mumbai and accused No. 3 claims to be the Manager of the said Trust. One Govind Lalwani (deceased) was for a long time Secretary of Nutan Jai Bharat Housing Co-operative Society of Jai Bharat Building, Shankar Ghanekar Marg, Prabha Devi, Mumbai. As back as on 31-10-1949 Shanta Kumar Mitra (deceased ) husband of Mrs. Nirmala Mitra acquired from the Builder Deepchand and C. Gandhi the title and possession over a second floor flat a...
Haripoda Mardi and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-06-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)BLJR1241; 2004CriLJ345
ORDERDeoki Nandan Prasad, J.1. This Revision is direction against the order dated 23rd August, 2002 passed in Cr. Revision No. 6 (C) of 2001, whereby and whereunder the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Saraikella allowed the revision application after setting aside the order dated 31-7-2001 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Saraikela in Misc. Case No. 414 of 2000 passed under Section 146(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure restraining both parties from going over the lands in question and the Officer-in-charge Chandil was appointed as Receiver.2. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the learned Revisional Court (Additional Sessions Judge) committed error in allowing the revision application after setting aside the order passed by the learned Sub-Division Magistrate, who rightly attached the land in question after being satisfied about the emergency and likelihood of apprehension of breach of peace. It is further argued that the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »