Jharkhand Court July 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.
Bisheshwar Murmu Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ326; [2003(4)JCR468(Jhr)]
ORDERLakshman Uraon, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 18.5.1991 and 21.5.1991 respectively passed by Sri Ram Vyas, Ram, 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka in Sessions Case No. 422/ 1990, whereby and whereunder, the appellant was convicted under Section 376, IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for five years.2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the written report, given by the informant, Chanchalakali Dasi, PW 1, to the Officer-in-Charge, Masalia-P.S., on that the basis of formal FIR, Ext. 3, was drawn. The informant has alleged that as usual on 14.12.1987 at 6 a.m. she was going to sell murhi to Golbazar. On her way to Golbazar when she reached Sitpahari, then the appellant, Bisheshwar Murmu, who was sitting there, forcefully caught hold of her with an intention to outrage her modesty. When she raised alarm then the appellant fled away. Shivlal Murmu (not examined) of village Bediakla saw the alleged occurrence. S...
Goverdhan Hembrom Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR670(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J.1. Heard Mr. M.M. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr, Azimuddin, learned JC to the GP I for the State-respondents.2. The petitioner in the instant case has challenged the validity of Annexure 9 which is the order dated 23.3.1998 and which has been passed pursuant to the order dated 24.11.1997 passed in CWJC No. 1284 of 1997(R). In the aforementioned Writ Application, the Petitioner's grievance was that inspite of the fact that he was senior to very many teachers, yet he was not being granted necessary promotion nor being given appropriate scales and consequently, he prayed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus.3. The case of the petitioner right from the beginning is that he was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on 28.5.1976 in a regular pay scale. He was transferred in the year 1982 from a primary school to a Middle School and in the year 1990he was given I.A. Trained Scale with effect from 1.4.1988. The claim of the petitioner is that he should be given the s...
Hari Prasad Singhania Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2003
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR105(Jhr)]
ORDERVikramaditya Prasad, J.1. Heard both the sides.This criminal miscellaneous application has been tiled for quashing the order dated 17.12.2002 paused by Shri Chamru Tanti, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka, in Cr. Rev. No. 79 of 2002/1 of 2002, whereby and whereunder the learned Additional Sessions Judge set aside the order of taking cognizance dated 24.6.2002 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dumka, in P.C.R. Case No. 187 of 2002, of the offence under Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code by which the learned SDJM Dumka, issued process for appearance of the accused of that case, who is opposite party No. 2, herein.2. The short facts of this case are that the petitioner/complainant Hari Prasad Singhania has filed a complaint case against the opposite party No. 2 alleging therein that they were on friendly term and on the request of the opposite party No. 2, the petitioner handed over Rs. 53,000/- to him which the accused/opposite party No. 2 undertook...
Md. NizamuddIn Khan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR523(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. This writ petition has been preferred by petitioner against the order dated 21st June, 2003, passed by Sri Arun Kumar Rai, Additional District and Sessions Judge-III, Dhanbad in Misc. Appeal No. 27/02 whereby and where under the appeal preferred by petitioner under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act, 1971, has been dismissed and the order of eviction dated 20th May, 2002 passed by the Estate Officer-cum-Divisional Engineer (Headquarter), Eastern Railway, Dhanbad has been upheld. 2. According to petitioner, the Railway quarter No. 166/D, at Diamond Crossing. Dhanbad was allotted in favour of one Sri Ishaque Khan, who entered into an agreement on 27th January. 1990 with him (the petitioner) after taking Rs. 50,000/- as security,- and rented the Railway quarters in his favour @ Rs. 300/- per month till the period of retirement of Sri Ishaque Khan. The authorities without taking into consideration the aforesaid agreement,...
Ganesh Singh and anr. Vs. Bishram Singh and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR527(Jhr)]
ORDER1. A suit, Title Suit No. 5 of 1986 was filed by the appellants herein as the plaintiffs in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Palamau, Daltonganj. The said suit was dismissed by the trial Court on 29.4.1989. An appeal was filed before this Court by the plaintiffs on 24.7.1989. That appeal was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 21.1.2002. This appeal was filed invoking Clause 10 of the Letter Patent. The Code of Civil Procedure, as amended by Act 22 of 2002 and Act 46 of 1999 was brought into force with effect from 1.7.2002. Section 100A of the Code of Civil Procedure introduced by Act 104 of 1976 with effect from 1.2.1977 was amended. The present appeal was filed only on 30.9.2002, after the coming into force of the amended Section 100A of the Code. The question is whether this appeal is maintainable or could be entertained by this Court. 2. Even at the outset, we must express our disappointment at the assistance we received in deciding this difficult question....
Gopal Mahto Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR558(Jhr)]
M.Y Eqbal, J. 1. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 20.6.2001 passed by respondents whereby the prayer of the petitioner for regularization has been rejected and further for direction to the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner.2. Petitioner's case is that he was appointed on daily wages basis in 1980 and thereafter in 1993 he was given the pay scale of Rs. 775-1025. It is contended by the petitioner that in terms of circular dated 18.6.1993 the respondents have decided to regularize the services of all daily wages employees who have been working prior to 1.8.1985. The petitioner earlier moved this Court by filing CWJC No. 2964/99(R) which was disposed of on 10.5.2001 with a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner and take decision. In pursuance of that direction the respondents considered the case of the petitioner and rejected his prayer for regularization on the ground that he has not been working since 1980.3. Mr. ...
Anjani Prasad Singh Vs. M.E.C.O.N. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR43(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner seeks a direction upon the respondents to provide free educational facilities to his children in term of Chapter VI, Clause 4 of the Valid Settlement dated 21.7.1995. A copy of the extract of the said clause has been annexed as Annexure 2 to the writ application. Clause 6.4 reads as under :'6.4. In case of death or permanent total disablement while in service or on retirement of employees, their children availing educational facilities in DAV Jawahar Vidya Mandir, Ranchi will continue to avail the facility of education as available to the children of serving employees.'3. In the instant case the petitioner has not retired after attaining the age of superannuation, rather, he sought voluntary retirement which was accepted and he was paid substantial amount. In that view of the matter Clause 6.4, as quoted hereinabove, does not apply to those employees who have voluntarily retired from service.4. Recently the Supre...
Ramu Manjhi Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2003
Reported in: [2003(3)JCR742(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 29th June, 1995 and 3.7.1995 respectively passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in connection with Sessions Trial No. 128/30 of 1991-95, whereby and whereunder the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. 2. Prosecution story in brief is that informant Bhagru Manjhi stated before the police that his sister Shanti Devi was married with the appellant Ramu Manjhi of the same village. The informant was working as a Khalasi in a truck. On 20.12.1990 at 10 a.m. he returned to his village and learnt that on the last night his brother-in-law committed murder of his sister by means of tangi. He went to the house of the appellant and found the dead body of his sister lying on a cot in a bedroom with several cut injuries and also blood stains on her face. He came to know from the...
Hemlal Mahto Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR309(Jhr)]
Tapen Sen, J. 1. Heard Mr. B.V. Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Atanu Banerjee, learned counsel appearing for the State respondents.2. The Amendment Application filed by the petitioner on 28.7.2000 praying inter alia for quashing the order dated 24.3.2000 passed in Revision Petition No. (C) 11/97 by the respondent No. 2 during the pendency of this Writ Application is allowed. It will form part of the records of this case.3. The petitioner had initially challenged the interim order dated 6.1.1998 (Annexure 5) passed by the Revisional Authority whereby and whereunder the operation of the order dated 20.11.1996 of the appellate authority was ordered to be kept in abeyance till disposal of the Revision Application. That prayer has now become infructuous in view of the subsequent prayer made by the petitioner in the aforementioned Amendment Application wherein he has challenged the order passed by the Revisional Authority. The petitioner has also made a prayer for a writ o...
Damodar Valley Corporation Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2003
Reported in: [2003(4)JCR49(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Petitioner who is the management of Damodar Valley Corporation prayed for quashing the Award passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bokaro Steel City, Bokaro in Reference Case No. 22 of 1989, whereby he has answered the reference in favour of the workman holding that the termination of the services of the workman from 21.2.1984 was wholly unjustified and directed for reinstatement and also for payment of arrears of wages and current wages.2. It appears that by notification dated 25.2.1987 the following disputes were referred to the labour Court for adjudication :(i) Whether the retrenchment of Sri Binay Kuinar, Technician Gr. III from 21.2.1984 is justified/ If not, whether he is entitled to reinstatement or/any other reliei?(ii) Whether the non-payment of wages of Sri Binay Kumar for the period from 24.2.1981 to 21.2.1984 is justified? If not, whether he is entitled to get the wages of that period.3. From the Award, it appears that the labour Court answering b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »