Jharkhand Court September 2005 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.
Akhil Poddar and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-12-2005
Reported in: III(2007)BC130; [2006(1)JCR30(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. In this application, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 31.7.1998 whereby their application for discharge was rejected by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur.2. That short facts giving rise to this application are that the opposite party No. 2 Miss Seema Kumari filed a complaint petition before the Chief Judicial Magistrate at Jamshedpur for taking action against the petitioners for committing offence under Section 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Chief Judicial Magistrate sent the complaint to Police under the provisions of Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code for investigation. After investigation, the Police submitted charge-sheet under Sections 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the petitioner on the basis of which cognizance was taken by the S.D.J.M. for the aforesaid offences.3. Subsequently, on 26.2.1...
Bokaro Steel Workers Union and ors. Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-12-2005
Reported in: [2006(108)FLR296]; [2005(4)JCR372(Jhr)]; (2006)IILLJ169Jhar
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Heard Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. P.K. Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.2. In this writ petition, the petitioner, namely, Bokaro Steel Workers Union representing the contract labourers, filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the Steel Authority of India Limited to implement and give effect to the notification issued under Section 10(1) of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970 prohibiting the contract labour in the nature of work as specified in the Schedule. They further seek direction upon the respondents to regularize the services of the contract labours/workmen with effect from 1993, under the aforesaid notification issued under Section 10 of the said Act.3. The respondent-SAIL having its Head Office at Calcutta has its captive mines of Limestone and Dolomite at Bhawanathpur in the district of Garhwa, which was opened in the year 1972 and the mining activities is going on si...
Md. Arshad Ali @ Md. Ashad Ali Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-12-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar34; [2006(1)JCR12(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In the writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order as contained in Memo No. 304. dated 4.5.2005 issued by the Commandant, Jharkhand Armed Police, Ranchi cancelling the business of the petitioner and allotting the same to respondent No. 3 and also for quashing the order as contained in the letter No. 3565, dated 19.5.2005 directing the petitioner to pay the outstanding dues to respondent No. 3. These letters have been annexed as Annexures 6 and 8 to the writ petition.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. The petitioner is the proprietor of A.A. Star Vision, Doranda and was registered as Cable operator by the Registering Authority for running cable television network. Registration was earlier granted for a period of one year which was, time to time, extended up to 2006. The petitioner has been running his cable business at BMP-1 premises, Doranda. Petitioner's case is that since the BMP-1 premises is a colony and, as such, in the ye...
Rajnikant and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-12-2005
Reported in: 2006(3)BLJR2332; [2006(1)JCR212(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. In this application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the order dated 14.9.1998 taking cognizance of the offences under Sections 420/406/120B, IPC in connection with Complaint Case No. 401/1998.2. The Opposite Party No. 2, Dhirendra Kumar Sinha, filed a Complaint Petition in the Court of CJM Ranchi against the petitioners making allegation of commission of the offence of cheating and criminal breach of trust and criminal conspiracy.3. The case of the Opposite Party No. 2 as alleged in the Complaint Petition is that the accused petitioners were running a firm, namely, M/s. Ruchi Enterprises, Patna which was supplier of electrical goods. Against proposed supply of electrical goods the Opposite Party/Complainant had paid a sum of Rs. 1,55,000/- and Rs. 772.80 paise but it is alleged that on some plea or the other the goods were not supplied. Thereafter a notice under registered cover was sent through Advocate on 18.2.1998 whereby the accused petitioners w...
Md. Muslim Ansari Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-12-2005
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR300(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The petitioner seeks a direction upon the respondents particularly respondent No. 3, the Circle Officer, Ratu Anchal, Ranchi to accept cess and rent and issue rent receipts in respect of the lands appertaining to Khata No. 383, plot Nos. 718 and 496, Khewat No. 2 situated at village Pundag in the district of Ranchi.2. Petitioner's ease is that one Bara Lal Kandarp Nath Sahdeo, Ex-intermediary of Khewat No. 2, by a grant of soda hukum-nama in the year 1947, settled the land in question in favour of S.K. Sahamat and S.K. Ajmat of the said village and delivered possession of the said land to them. The said Sahamat and Ajmat, in their turn, executed a registered kabuliat dated 9.1.1947 in respect of the said land and came in possession of the same. Petitioner's further case is that on vesting of the zamindari under the Bihar Land Reforms Act, the ex-landlord submitted return showing the aforesaid two settles as raiyats. It is alleged that the petitioner being the sole elde...
Khagendra Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-09-2005
Reported in: [2005(4)JCR211(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order of his transfer dated 18.6.2005 as contained in Annexure 1 and also that of respondent No. 4.2. The petitioner's case is that after the bifurcation of the State of Jharkhand under the provisions of the Bihar Reorganization Act, the petitioner has been allotted Jharkhand State Cadre, and thus he belongs to the cadre of Jharkhand Education Service, Class I. The petitioner's first posting was as the RDDE, Santhal Pargana at Dumka where he had joined on 20th April, 2002. The petitioner was, hereafter, transferred to and posted as OSD, Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi on 1.7.2004. The petitioner could not even complete one year as OSD, Jharkhand Academic Council, Ranchi an he surprisingly got another transfer order dated 18.6.2005, whereby he was transferred and posted as Regional Deputy Director, Palamau. Medninagar (Annexure 1). According to him, the petitioner is the President of J...
Pankaj Bibhuti and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-09-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ926; II(2006)DMC489; [2005(4)JCR435(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. All the appellants were tried for the offence under Sections 304-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code for committing the dowry death of Nitu Devi in furtherance of common intention and also for the charges under Sections 498-A/34 of the Indian Penal Code for subjecting Nitu Devi (deceased) for cruelty in connection with demand of dowry.2. The learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Garhwa by his Judgment dated 22.5.2004 in Sessions Trial No. 138/2001 convicted the appellant No. 1, for the offence under Section 304-B, IPC as well as under Section 498-A/34, IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for a period of 10 years for the offence under Section 304-B of the IPC, however no separate sentence was passed for the offence under Section 498-A, IPC.The appellant Nos. 2 to 5 were acquitted from the charge under Section 304-B, IPC but they were convicted for the offence under Section 498-A/34, IPC and were sentenced to undergo RI for a period of two years each and also to pay f...
Grd Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-08-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar38; IV(2006)BC397; [2005(4)JCR379(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order as contained in Memo No. 637, dated 21.6.2005 whereby Work Order issued in favour of respondent No. 5 for the execution of work in the Water Resources Department.2. The Notice inviting tender was published in the newspaper dated 8.12.2004 under the signature of Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division No. 1, Barhet, Sahibganj inviting tender from the contractors registered with the Water Resources Department for the works given under clause 7 of the said tender notice. The conditions, inter alia, mentioned in the tender notice was that, the Contractor has to deposit by way of security, six years saving certificate, 3 or 5 years' Post Office Term Deposit, and Bank Guarantee of any nationalized Bank which must be within the jurisdiction of the Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Deoghar. Petitioner said to have complied all the three conditions and quoted the price below 11.3% of the te...
iag Company Ltd. (Formerly the Indo Asahi Glass Co. Ltd.) Through Mr. ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-08-2005
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR374(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner-Company has prayed for quashing the order of certificate and entire proceeding of Certificate Case No. 1/04-05 initiated against the company under the provisions of Public Demands Recovery Act for realization of arrears of wages, of August and September 2004, of the concerned workmen under the provisions of Section 33(C) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the ID Act).2. The petitioner's case is that the petitioner-Company is Public Limited Company Incorporated under the Indian Companies Act and is engaged in manufacturing of flat glass. The factory of the company is situated at Bhurkunda, Ram-garh within the district of Hazaribagh. The company purchased the said factory in the year 1999. The said Company has about 1400 old permanent employees and more than 100 casual and contract workers. Despite financial constraints, the Company's unit is running without interruption for more than five years....
Tripurari Mohan Prasad Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-07-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ774; [2005(4)JCR415(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The petitioner, who is accused in different Scam Cases of Animal Husbandry Department (commonly known as 'Fodder Scam Cases'), having preferred these writ petitions and having raised common question, all the three writ petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.WP (Cr) No. 74 of 2005In this case, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 8th February, 2005, passed by the learned Special Judge, CBI, Ranchi, in RC 5(A) of 2000, whereby, the learned Court below while rejecting the prayer, made on behalf of the petitioner to issue summons under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on certain witnesses, also rejected the prayer of the petitioner to record statements of the accused persons under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure along with the statement of the accused persons in RC 47(A) of 1996 (Pat), recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.From the statement, made on behalf of the petitioner, and t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »