Jharkhand Court August 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.
G.P. Pandey and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-10-2004
Reported in: [2005]275ITR212(Jharkhand); [2004(4)JCR274(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In all these revision applications filed under Sections 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in short Cr PC) the petitioners have challenged the legality and validity of order dated 11.7.2003 passed by Special Judge (Economic Offences) Ranchi by which he rejected the petition filed by the petitioners for dispensing with their personal appearance and for being allowed to appear through their advocates under the provisions of Section 205 of the Cr PC.2. These cases arose out of series of complaint cases filed against the petitioners and others in the Court of Special Judge (Economic Offence) Ranchi. Petitioner No. 1 the relevant time was Director (Production) and petitioner No. 2 was Senior Manager (Finance) in the Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd. (in short H.E.C.) Dhurwa, Ranchi. In the said complaint case allegations were made that petitioners were responsible for deduction of tax from the salary of the employees of different sections of H.E.C. and further ...
Haripada Sarkar Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-10-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)BLJR1655
R.K. Merathia, J. 1. Heard the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for release of the truck in question, i.e., W.B. 73-3441 pending in the Confiscation Case No. 2 of 2004. He submitted that truck in question is a commercial vehicle and it was hired through one Jagdamba Freight Movers by the owner of the timber, namely, Raj Kumar Sharma (Annexure 1). Petitioner is not accused in the case. It is further submitted that petitioner will discharge his onus as required in law, in the confiscation case, that the truck is lying exposed to weather since 20.1.2004, that nobody will be benefited if the truck is allowed to rot.2. State counsel submitted that in view of the Supreme Court judgment ordinarily the truck involved in forest offences should not be released till the final culmination of the proceedings. However, he submitted that if the same is released, it must be against the bank guarantee for the value fixed by the Divisional Forest Officer.3. In the circumstances, petitio...
G.P. Pandey Vs. Union of India
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-10-2004
Reported in: [2006]151TAXMAN79(NULL)
1. In all these revision applications filed under section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Cr. P.C.'), the petitioners have challenged the legality and validity of the order dated 11-7-2003, passed by the Special Judge (Economic Offences), Ranchi, by which he rejected the petition filed by the petitioners for dispensing with their personal appearance and for being allowed to appear through their advocates under the provisions of section 205 of the Cr.P.C.2. These cases arose out of a series of complaint cases filed against the petitioners and others in the court of Special Judge (Economic Offence), Ranchi. Petitioner No. 1 at the relevant time was a director (production) and petitioner No. 2 was a senior manager (finance) in the Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the H. E. C.') Dhurwa, Ranchi. In the said complaint case, allegations were made that the petitioners were responsible for deduction of tax from the ...
Kalindri Devi and ors. Vs. Saro Devi and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-09-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR152(Jhr)]
Vikramaditya Prasad, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the dismissal of the Partition Suit No. 14/1988 on contest with costs. The Genealogical table given in the plaint, which is not disputed by the defendants-respondents, is hereunder :-- GENEALOGY | Lodeng Sahu ________________________________________________________________________________ | | | | | Surajnath Sukhdeo Hira Nageswari Rukmini Devi ____|___________ ______|___________ |_________ | | | | | Rampril Babulal Bandhu Bigu @ Rabindra Em NarainAccording to the plaintiffs, the family of the plaintiffs and defendants are governed by Mitakshra School of Hindu Law read with Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The plaintiffs filed the suit for partition of the properties given in the Schedule A, B, C, D, E, F and G. The Schedule A property, according to the plaintiffs, are situated in the village - Birkera and recorded in the name of Dirpal Sahu, Schedule B properties were purchased by Dirpal Sahu along with Jainarayan Sahu and o...
Nalini Kant Jha Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-09-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ4770; [2004(4)JCR524(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the learned Advocate General for the respondents.2. The contempt application was filed on 14.11.2000 complaining that a direction issued by the Court on 15.7.1993 in CWJC No. 12007 of 1992 had not been complied with and this amounted to a willful disobedience of the order of the Court. The learned Advocate General pointed out that no action under the Contempt of Courts Act could be taken in view of the bar contained in Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act, the Contempt of Court petition not having been filed within one year of the disobedience. Learned counsel for the petitioner sought to meet this plea by pointing out that the petitioner had earlier filed another writ petition in the Patna High Court which was disposed of on 15.9.2000 by Annexure-6 judgment giving liberty to the petitioner to move the Court under the Contempt of Courts Act and the present Contempt of Court case has been filed within two months of that order.3. Obviously...
Nand Gopal Choubey and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-06-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR86(Jhr)]
ORDERTapen Sen, J.1. Heard the parties.2. This writ petition has been filed by two petitioners who are both promotees and were so promoted (as stated in paragraph 11) to the post of Assistant Conservators of Forest with effect from 20.6.1987 and 17.10.1987.3. According to Mrs. Ritu Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners, 19 direct recruits had moved the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India against a judgment of a Division Bench of the Patna High Court dismissing their writ petition in which they had challenged the final seniority list in which they were shown to be junior to the promotees in service. Four of these direct recruits, according to Mrs. Ritu Kumar, have now been allotted the Bihar Cadre. In that view of the matter, according to the petitioners, only 14 direct recruits remain and therefore, they claim that their case should be reconsidered and promotions granted vis-a-vis the direct recruits.4. Annexure-1 is the judgment of the Supreme Court and the observations of the said Ho...
Tarkeshwar Nath Katariyar Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-06-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR57(Jhr)]
ORDERHari Shankar Prasad, J.1. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the order dated 12.8.2003 passed in Complaint Case No. 506 of 2003 whereby and where under the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribagh took cognizance under Sections 406 and 420, IPC.2. The facts briefly stated are that O.P. No. 2 complainant filed a complaint case in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh stating therein that she had expressed her desire to purchase a piece of land which was actually a rasta in Khata No. 366, plot Nos. 9357 and 9358 and price of the land was fixed at Rs. 25.000/-. In pursuance of that, com-plainant-O.P. No. 2 entered into agreement with the petitioner for purchase of that piece of land. Thereafter, a sum of Rs. 10.000/- was given to the petitioner in advance and the petitioner allowed her to construct latrine and tank over the same. She in pursuance of the agreement, constructed the latrine and tank ove...
Satendra Kumar Singh Vs. Devendra Pal Singh
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-06-2004
Reported in: 2006ACJ2063; [2004(4)JCR402(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J. 1. Heard the parties at length. With the consent of the counsel for the parties, this Misc. Appeal is being disposed of finally.2. Mr. Rajiv Anand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. A.K. Lall, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the sole respondent made their submissions on merit of the appeal.3. This appeal against the order dated 13.9.2003 passed by the 7th Additional District and Sessions Judge. Palamau at Daltonganj in Misc. Case No. 4/2002 (arising out of M.V. Case No. 16/1992). By the said impugned order the petition under Order IX, Rule 13, CPC filed by the appellant has been dismissed.4. The case of the appellant is that the respondent filed an application under Sections 140 and 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 praying for grant of compensation on account of the injury sustained by him on 7.10.1991 in a motor vehicle accident involving Bus No. BR-3 H/5455. The said petition was filed in the Court of District Judge-cu...
Victor Mining Industries Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-06-2004
Reported in: [2005(1)JCR538(Jhr)]
ORDERLakshman Uraon, J.1. The petitioner has prayed to quash the order dated 9.9.2002 (Annexure-6) passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Rajmahal in Cr. Misc. No. 451 of 2001 whereby the petitioner was restrained from operating the lease hold mines.2. The petitioner is the proprietor of Victor Mining Industries and the mining lease hold area had been leased by the State Government in the name of his mother late Karuna Noel Hembrom on 16th May, 1985 for a term of 20 years and on 11th August, 1981 by a lease deed executed on 16th May, 1995. The area consists of 36.5 acres at village Saidhpur Buzmrug No. 21. Besides those areas there are other plots included in the lease deed after the death of his mother. Petitioner filed application dated 14th September, 1995 requesting the Government of Bihar to allow him to operate the mining works for the remaining period of lease as successor of his mother. Additional Secretary, Mines and Geology Department. Government of Bihar allowed the petiti...
Jetha Munda Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: [2004(4)JCR127(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The sole appellant Jetha Munda has preferred this Jail Appeal against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 6th February, 1996 and 9th February, 1996, passed by Smt. Shakuntala Sinha, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, Khunti, in Sessions Trial No. 412 of 1992, arising out of GR No. 247 of 1991, whereby and whereunder, the learned Court below has convicted the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default whereof to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years.2. The informant Sanika Munda (PW 1) in his fardbeyan (Ext. 2), recorded on 14.5.1991 at 10.00 hours by Sri M. Prasad, Officer-in-Charge, Karra Police Station, at Village-Dumargarhi Bantoli, Police Station-Karra, District-Ranchi, has alleged that on 13th May, 1991 while he was sleeping in his house, appellant Jetha Munda went to him and informed that he had assaulted his brother Bh...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »