Jharkhand Court March 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.
Tusu Sahis and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-18-2004
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR415(Jhr)]
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. The appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 8.6.2000 passed in Sessions Trial No. 229/128 of 1998-98, whereby and whereunder the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur held the appellants guilty under Section 326, IPC and convicted and sentenced them to undergo RI for three years.2. Prosecution case in brief is that Helibala Karmakar gave a fardbeyan before Sri D. Ram, ASI of Patamda P.S. on 12.1.1998 at about 12.45 hours at Patamda Rajkiya hospital alleging that on Sunday i.e. on 11.1.1998 appellant Tusu came to her house in the evening and called her to her house. She went to the house of Chhotu Lal with Tusu and at that time wife of Chhotu Lal namely Padma Sahis and wife of Chhotu's elder brother namely Sakuntala were present in the house. After some time Padma Sahis, Sakuntala Sahis and Tusu Sahis lighted a Dibri and put fire with the help of flames of the Dhibri in the body of the deceased Helibala. T...
Kishori Prasad Rai Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-18-2004
Reported in: [2005(2)JCR412(Jhr)]
Hari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 30.6.1998 and order of sentence dated 1.7.1998 passed in Sessions Trial No. 4 of 1997 whereby and where under the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge. Giridih held the sole appellant guilty under Section 304, Part I of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and convicted and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for seven years and also to pay fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to pay the fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for two months.2. Prosecution case in brief is that Krishna Prasad Rai, informant, gave a fardbeyan before Srikant Singh of Deori P.S. in the male ward of public health centre at Deori on 2.7.1996 at 10.00 p.m. to the effect that the same day at about 3.00 p.m. in the evening he was constructing a brick wall east of his house of which partition of the land had already taken place about forty years ago with his uncle Kishori Rai and he was constructing on his own share of land on which h...
Ajay Kumar Modi and ors. Vs. Somar Mahto and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: III(2004)BC397; 2004(2)BLJR1043; [2004(2)JCR298(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the plaintiffs-appellant stands directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 13.2.1989 and 23.2.1989 respectively passed in Money Appeal No. 1 of 1986 by Shri Uma Shankar, 1st Additional District Judge, Hazaribagh whereby and whereunder the Judgment and decree dated 29.3.1986 and 17.4.1986 passed in Money Suit No. 10 of 1984 by Munsif, Hazaribagh was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed.2. The plaintiffs-appellant had filed the said money suit for realisation of Rs. 1963.75 paisa along with interest @ 12% per annum from the defendants-respondent.3. The case of the plaintiffs-appellant, in brief, is that Plot Nos. 344, 349 and 406 having an area of 10 decimals, 48 decimals and 47 decimals respectively appertaining to khata No. 41 detailed in Schedule--A of the plaint was recorded in the name of Lakhi Mahto in the Survey Records of Right and his son, namely, Moti Mahto inherited the said land after the death of the said r...
Etwa Oraon and ors. Vs. Karo Oraon and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR303(Jhr)]
Vishnudeo Narayan, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the plaintiffs-appellant stands directed against the impugned judgment and decree dated 30.4.1988 and 7.5.1988 respectively passed in Title Appeal No. 6 of 1987 by Shri Krishna Nand Singh, Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi whereby and whereunder the judgment and decree dated 31.7.1986 and 16.8.1986 passed in Partition Suit No. 53 of 1978/42 of 1985 by Additional Sub-Judge, Ranchi was affirmed and the appeal was dismissed.2. The appellants have filed the said suit for partition of the suit property detailed in Schedules 'B' 'C' of the plaint and also for a declaration that the order under Section 71-A of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) is void, illegal and erroneous.3. The case of the appellants is that the parties to the suit are members of the joint Hindu family being the descendants of a common ancestor resident of village Senha Tola Bartoli, P.S. Senna, District Ranchi (now Lohardagga...
Rajneesh Mishra Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR608(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard counsel on all sides in the presence of the Chief Engineer and the representatives of the Contractor.2. Mr. Jerath, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the undertaking given by the contractor has been breached and action under the Contempt of Courts Act or under Article 215 of the Constitution of India should be taken with reference to I.A. No. 154 of 2004 filed by him in that behalf. The learned Government Counsel instructed by the Chief Engineer submits that the work of erecting the Dais, wood work, plaster work, approach road work, grill work, Hazat work, bathroom work and other miscellaneous works are still to be completed and that there is no sincere attempt to complete the work. Counsel on behalf of the Contractor tries to trot out the lame excuse of paucity of fund, a plea which we cannot accept in the circumstances when in a contract involving a sum of around Rs. 7.5 crores, the contractor has already been paid more than Rs. 6.00 crores (six crores). M...
Ram Bahadur Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR217(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The petitioner is challenging the order of his termination on the ground that on the basis of certain charges a departmental proceeding and also a criminal case was instituted but no action was taken in the departmental proceeding rather he was exonerated in 1995. But on the basis of the conviction of the petitioner in criminal case in 2001 the impugned order was issued that too before seven days of his superannuation.2. Mr. V.P. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn my attention to Rule 166 of the Bihar Board Miscellaneous Rules and submitted that the provision has not been complied with in as much as before passing the order of termination the principles of natural justice has not been followed. From perusal of the counter-affidavit it appears that the petitioner was convicted in Vigilance Case No. 9/1989 and Special Case No. 12/1989 under Sections 7, 13(1) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act was sentenced to undergo imprisonment ...
Babban Ram Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-17-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR501(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J. 1. Heard Mr. V. Shivnath learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Saurav Arun learned counsel appearing for the State.2. The only prayer of the petitioner us stated in para 1 of the writ application is for direction to the respondents to declare that the petitioner has been promoted as Sub-Inspector of Police w.e.f. 20th August, 1994, on the ground, which has been formulated in para 3 of the writ petition by the petitioner, that the respondents have no jurisdiction to deny the promotion of the petitioner to the post of Sub-Inspector of police, when the petitioner has been exonerated from the charges made in Departmental proceeding Nos. 94/91 and 3/95.3. It is stated in the writ petition that by issue of Annexure-1, the order dated 20.12.1995, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Sub-Inspector from the post of Asst. Sub-Inspector w.e.f. 26.8.1994, but the benefit of the promotion was denied to the petitioner by the Supdt. of Police on the sole...
State of Jharkhand and anr. Vs. Pradeep Kumar Dey and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-16-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)BLJR1326; 2005CriLJ2304; [2004(2)JCR499(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard both sides, with the consent of both sides, this appeal is being disposed of finally even at this stage.2. This Letters Patent Appeal is filed by the State of Jharkhand and its forest officials, the respondents in WPC No. 1206 of 2002. WPC No. 1206 of 2002 was filed by the writ petitioner, respondent No. 1 herein claiming to be the owner of a truck bearing No. BR-18M-1568. The said vehicle was found carrying illicit timber and was detained by the forest authorities. The driver, who was in the vehicle, on being confronted, stated that the timber was illicitly purchased. It was found that he had no valid papers for transit of the timber. Therefore, the timber was confiscated and a proceeding for confiscation of the vehicle that carried the illicit timber, was initiated. The owner of the vehicle, the writ petitioner, was given notice. He filed a show cause stating that he was not aware of illicit timber being carried in his vehicle and that he had given the vehicle for the u...
Josef Tirckey Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-16-2004
Reported in: [2004(2)JCR478(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. The father of the petitioner died in harness on 30.10.1990. After the death of his father, he applied for appointment of compassionate ground and the case of the petitioner was recommended for compassionate appointment by the Executive Engineer. Advance Planning Water Wage Division No. 1 Gumla, vide letter No. 197 dated 5.5.1995 which has been annexed as Annexure-I to the writ petition.3. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he applied for appointment on compassionate ground within live years from the date of the death of his father but the Deputy Collector, Establishment, Gumla, by order dated 21.12.1996 as contained in Annexure-2 to the writ petition rejected the claim of the petition on the ground that the application for appointment on compassionate ground was time barred.4. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even the Executive Engineer. Advance Planning Water Wage Division N...
Arun Kumar Trivedi Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-16-2004
Reported in: [2004(3)JCR238(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard the counsel for the parties.2. In this review application the petitioner seeks review of the judgment and order dated 3.6.2003 passed in WPS No. 151/ 2003. In the said writ petition the petitioner had prayed for quashing the letter dated 25.9.2002 issued by the authority of the Jharkhand State Electricity Board refusing to accept the joining/services of the petitioner in Jharkhand State Electricity Board. The writ petition was dismissed holding that the respondent-JSEB was right in refusing the joining/services of the petitioner in JSEB, Paragraphs 10 and 11 of the judgment are worth to be quoted, which read as under :Admitted facts which emerge from the affidavits filed by the parties are that before the creation of the State of Jharkhand, petitioner was posted as Electrical Executive Engineer at Chapra in the erstwhile State of Bihar petitioner without waiting for order of transfer or order of deputation from the erstwhile B.S.E.B. and without being reliev...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »