Jharkhand Court January 2004 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.
i.T.W. Signode India Ltd. (i) Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-14-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR213(Jhr)]; (2007)8VST182(Jharkh)
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J. and Tapen Sen, J.1. Heard both sides.2. This is an application for refund of the tax paid under the Bihar Finance Act by the petitioner in excess of its liability to tax under the Act for the assessment year 1998-99. According to the petitioner, a sum of Rs. 12,96,210 is due by way of refund. According to the department, on verification of the records as of now, it was found that the petitioner was entitled to a refund of Rs. 2,68,676 and the same was refunded to it as per the refund voucher dated 03.01.2003. It is further stated in paragraph 7 of the supplementary counter-affidavit that by letter dated 03.01.2004, the department has requested the Treasury Officer, Jamshedpur to verify the rest of the amounts claimed by the petitioner. What is found due on further verification, would be paid to the petitioner as soon as certified by the Treasury Officer. In other words it is spelt out that a further verification is being made with the help of the Treasury Off...
i.T.W. Signode India Ltd. (ii) Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-14-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR212(Jhr)]
P.K. Balasubramanyan. C.J. and Tapen Sen, J.1. Heard both sides.2. This is an application by the petitioner for refund of the tax paid under the Bihar Finance Act in excess of its liability to tax under that Act for the assessment year 1995-96. According to the petitioner, a sum of Rs. 5,96,309 is due by way of refund. According to the department, on verification of the records as of now, it was found that the petitioner was entitled to a refund of Rs. 4,60,421 and the same was refunded to it as per refund voucher dated 03.01.2003. It is further stated in paragraph 7 of the supplementary affidavit, that by letter dated 03.01.2004, the department has requested the Treasury Officer, Jamshedpur to verify the rest of the amounts claimed by the petitioner. Whatever is found due on further verification, would be paid to the petitioner as soon as certified by the Treasury Officer. In other words, it is spelt out that further verification is being made with the help of the Treasury officer, Ja...
Kudrat Ansari and anr. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-14-2004
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR477(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the appellant has been directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 13.7.1998 passed in Sessions Trial No. 349 of 1997/Trial No. 10/1997 by Shri Anant Vyay Singh, 3rd Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi whereby and whereunder both the appellants named above were found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and they were convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years each under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant Kudrat Ansari was also found guilty under Section 25(1)(b) of the Arms Act and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo RI for five years. Appellant Jainul Ansari was also found guilty under Section 27 of the Arms Act and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo RI for five years. However, both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the written report (Ext. 2) of PW 1, Rajendra Prasa...
Bateshwar Singh and anr. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-14-2004
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR446(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the appellants is directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 24.8.1998 passed in Sessions Trial No. 32 of 1986 by Shri Chandra Sen Choubey, 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh whereby and where under both the appellants were found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and they were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each. However, both the appellants and other six co-accused persons were not found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code and they were accordingly acquitted.2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the fardbeyan (Ext. 5) of PW 4 Kishori Sao, the informant recorded by S.I. Chulan Singh O/C Bishnugarh Police Station on 1.9.1983 at 11.00 hours in village Mukti Dudhmania, Police Station--Bishnugarh, District Hazaribagh regarding the occurrence which is said to have taken place on tha...
Baida Ram and anr. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-13-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1923
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 21 -3-1998 and order of sentence dated 25-3-1998 passed in Sessions Trial No. 337 of 1993/11 of 1994 whereby and whereunder the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, Lohardaga held the appellants guilty under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and convicted and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for five years.2. Prosecution case in brief is that Savitri Kumari, the informant, lodged an FIR with the Kuru Police Station on 16-2-1993 at about 5.15 p.m. alleging inter alia that on 13-12-1993 at about 7.00 p.m. she had gone out of her house to attend the call of nature in the field where suddenly Gopal Mahli and Baida Ram came and caught her and forcibly took her to hill side, although she tried to raise alarm but the appellant No. 2-Gopal Mahli, at the point of dagger, asked her to keep quiet and thereafter he committed rape on her. When she started weeping, then he threatened to stab her to...
Jaddu Choudhary and anr. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-13-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ2144
Hari Shankar Prasad, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 23-.4-1998 and order of sentence dated 24-4-1998 passed in Sessions Trial No. 49 of 1987 whereby and where under the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Palamau at Daltonganj held the appellants guilty under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and convicted and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for 21/2 years.2. Prosecution case in brief is that in the night of 6/7-1-1996, a dacoity was committed in the house of the informant and dacoits were holding gun, roll and lathi. On alarm of the inmates, relatives sleeping outside the house, the villagers came there and they chased the dacoits and one gun was recovered from the dacoit which was later on handed over to the police. The informant and the family members claimed to identify the accused in the torchlight. The informant Jokhan Sao lodged an FIR with the Garhwa police station and a case under Section 395, IPC was registered. Some persons ...
Mangra Indwar Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-13-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ2727
Hari Shankar Prasad, J. 1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22-5-1998 passed in Sessions Trial No. 188/96, whereby and whereunder the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Simdega held the appellant guilty under Section 376, I.P.C. and convicted and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 10 years.2. The prosecution case in brief is that Lilli Grace Minz lodged an FIR with Kurdeg P. S. stating therein that on 6-3-1996 she was in the house of her maternal uncle (Silas Xaxa) in village Parkala. On the same day at about 8.30 p.m. she was standing on the road near the house of her maternal uncle when Mangra Indwar (Appellant) caught her and took her towards the field and when she wanted to raise alarm, appellant covered her mouth with his hand. She was taken to the field near a mango tree. Appellant threw her on the ground and committed rape on her. The prosecutrix wanted to raise alarm but she was threatened that she would be killed. A...
Lakshman Yadav, Secretary, D.A.V. High School and anr. Vs. Parasnath S ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-13-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR134(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This is an application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Order XLI, Rule 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the respondents No. 8 and 10 in WP (PIL) No. 3988 of 2002 praying that the writ petition be reheard and our judgment dated 10.12.2003 rendered in the writ petition be recalled. This application is filed on the basis that the name of counsel for respondents 8 and 10 did not appear in the list on the relevant date and hence they could not be present to assist the Court while the matter was being heard.2. Though in the list dated 10.12.2003 the name of Mr. Shekhar Prasad Sinha appeared and his name is shown in the judgment dated 10.12.2003 as appearing for respondents 8 and 10, we thought that we should give an opportunity to Mr. Anwar who moved this petition, of being heard in defence of the writ petition so that we could also consider whether any error has been made while issuing the directions on 10.12.2003. Hence, without going into the que...
Laldeo Mahto Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-13-2004
Reported in: II(2004)DMC41
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order sentence dated 30.9.1997 passed in Sessions Trial No. 106 of 1996 whereby and whereunder the learned 5th Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi held the appellant guilty under Sections 306 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) and convicted and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for ten years under Section 306, I.P.C. and three years under Section 498A, I.P.C. but directed both the sentences to run concurrently.2. Prosecution case in brief is that Sarju Mahto, the informant, father of the deceased Sohari Devi gave a written report before Argora P.S. stating inter alia therein that he married his daughter Sohari Devi in the year 1984 with Laldeo Mahto. Some time after marriage, his son-in-law Laldeo Mahto demanded Rs. 1,000-1,500 per month from him and also asked for giving some employment to him (Laldeo Mahto) and on non-fulfilment of demand, he used to assault his daughter and used to writ...
Banarsi Singh Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-13-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1532
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 19-2-1998 and order of sentence dated 20-2-1998 passed in Sessions Trial No. 118/ 1997, whereby and whereunder the learned third Additional Sessions Judge, Deoghar, held the appellant guilty under Section 376, I.P.C. and convicted and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment, to further undergo R.I. for two months.2. Prosecution case in brief is that on 18-4-1996 Salita Devi went to village Jasobandh for grinding wheat at 4 p.m. and while she was returning to her village from Jasobandh after grinding wheat and when she reached near Jhuri Jungle near the Khamar of one Prayag Rai, appellant, all of a sudden, at about 4.30 p.m., caught her from behind and asked her for sexual intercourse and when she denied and raised alarm, she was forcefully thrown on the ground and rape was committed on her in spite of resistance given by her (informa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »