Jharkhand Court January 2006 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.
Umesh Kumar Rawani Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-16-2006
Reported in: II(2006)DMC80; [2006(1)JCR274(Jhr)]
ORDERN. Dhinakar, C.J.1. The petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1000/- p.m. as maintenance to O.P. No. 2, Sumitra Devi who is the mother of the petitioner on the ground that he has failed and neglected to maintain his mother who cannot maintain herself.2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that he is not assailing the order of the Family Court on merit and that he would only plead on the quantum of maintenance awarded by the Family Court. He submits that the petitioner has seven children and his earning is less than Rs. 7000/- p.m. and, therefore, an award of maintenance passed against him by which he was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1,000/- will put him in hardship.3. I find no substance in the said argument as the Family Court took into consideration the relevant aspects and ultimately felt that the O.P. No. 2 is the mother of the petitioner and aged about 65 years and awarded a minimum sum of Rs. 1000/- as maintenance,I find no reason to interfere with the...
Sk. Mamtaz Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-16-2006
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR274a(Jhr)]
ORDERN. Dhinakar, C.J.1. The petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1000/- p.m. as maintenance to his wife and a sum of Rs. 500/- each to his children, totaling a sum of Rs. 2000/- as maintenance under Section 125, Cr PC.2. A petition under Section 125, Cr PC was filed by the father-in-law of the petitioner on behalf of his deaf and dumb daughter whose marriage was solemnised with the petitioner on 15th November, 1993. In the said petition it was alleged that the petitioner in this revision, after having married his daughter, ill-treated, demanded dowry and later chased her out of the house. The Family Court after accepting the evidence let in by the applicant, Altaf Hussain directed the petitioner to pay maintenance as directed above.3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner is only a tailor by profession and his only earning is Rs. 1.500/- p.m. the order of maintenance directing him to pay a total sum of Rs. 2000/- p.m. is on the higher si...
Ramesh Kumar JaIn Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-16-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR106(Jhr)]
ORDERN. Dhinakar, C.J.1. The petitioner, on being tried and found guilty for the offence under Sections 25(1-B) and 26 of the Arms Act, was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and six months. The appellate Court confirmed the said conviction as well as the sentence. Hence, the present revision.2. The allegation against the petitioner is that on 17.2.1989, house of the petitioner was searched by Sri S.C. Jha, Officer-in-charge of Mandu police station of Hazaribagh district and on such search he found one rifle and five live cartridges. According to the prosecution, they were seized and seizure list was attested by the witness and a case being crime No. 69/89 was registered at Manclu Police Station. After investigation the final report was filed. The petitioner denied the allegations.3. Learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner, contends that since S.C. Jha. the officer who is alleged to have seized the material objects from the petitioner's house and the witnesses ...
Baleshwar Mandal Vs. Anup Mandal
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-16-2006
Reported in: 2(2006)DMC265
ORDERN. Dhinakar, C.J.1. Baleshwar Mandal. the petitioner herein, was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 500 p.m. as maintenance under Section 125, Cr. P.C. to his illegitimate child. The petitioner is aggrieved by the said order of the Family Court.2. Anup Mandal filed a petition through his mother, Malti Devi in the Family Court, Dumka. In the said petition it has been alleged that the petitioner in this revision committed rape on Malti Devi, who has been examined as P.W. 4, on account of which she became pregnant and delivered a child who is O.P. No. 1. The Family Court considering the evidence placed before it directed the petitioner, Baleshwar Mandal to pay a sum of Rs. 500 as maintenance to his illegitimate child under Section 125, Cr. P.C. and directed that the said amount should be paid from the date of the application.3. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously contends that P.W. 4 gave two different versions one before the Criminal Court and the other before the Fam...
Ashok Digar. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-16-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1881; 2006(1)EASTCRIC417; AIR2006(1)JHAR621; 2006(2)DMC252
Judgment :-(1.) The petitioner was ordered to pay a sum of Rs. l.000/- as maintenance under Section 125 Cr. P. C. to Sunlta Devi who is his wife and O. P. No. 2 in this revision Aggrieved by the said order passed by the Family Court the present revision is filed.(2.) The O. P. No 2 was married on 29-4-2002 to the petitioner and thereafter she was living in the house of the petitioner. According to O. P. No 2 as she was subjected to cruelty and torture by the petitioner she left her matrimonial home and that the petitioner has failed and neglected to maintain her. When the petition was filed with the above averment it was taken on file. On notice being served the petitioner appeared before the Family Court. He denied the allegation but the Family Court, finding that the case of the O. P. No. 2 Sunita Devi to be true, directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 1000/- p.m as maintenance(3.) On going through the order 1 find no irregularity or illegality in the same. The revision is ...
Shri Bishwakarma Furniture Workshop and anr. Vs. Santanu Sarkar and an ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-10-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar89; I(2007)BC282; [2006(2)JCR87(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree passed in Money Appeal No. 2/01/1/04 by the learned 2nd Additional District Judge (F.T.C.), Jamtara. The defendants-respondents are the appellants. The plaintiffs had filed money suit for a decree for realization of a sum of Rs. 10,500 from the defendants with interest @ 12% per annum against the defendants / appellants.2. The case of the plaintiffs was that the defendants-appellants were known to them and they were running a business. The defendants requested the plaintiffs to stand as a guarantor required for sanction, of a loan of Rs. 8.000/- to the defendants by a Bank. The plaintiff on the request of the defendants stood guarantor and the loan was sanctioned. The defendant No, 2 was required to pay back the amount of loan with interest as per the agreement. The plaintiff was under impression that the defendant No. 2 was making regular payment. Suddenly in the year 1985 the Bank informed the plain...
Budhni Devi and ors. Vs. Ashutosh Sharma and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-09-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR92(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. Heard.2. This second appeal has been preferred by the defendants/appellants/ respondents.3. The plaintiffs/appellants/respondents filed a suit in the Court below for declaration of their right, title and interest in respect of the suit lands, described in Scheduled B of the plaint. The plaintiffs also prayed for recovery of possession and for injunction restraining the respondent not to raise any construction or structure over the suit land. The suit land measuring 3/4 decimals, appertains to Khata No. 566, Plot No. 53351/7833 of Maufa Chas, District Bokaro. The plaintiffs case is that an area of 3 decimals of the said plot was purchased by one Ram Jagnania from Nagarmal Jagnania with specific boundary. Originally the said land measuring an area of 31 decimals was settled to one Anu Gope. He having been in peaceful possession, had sold that entire land to one Washi Jagnania and Banbari Lal Jagnania by virtue of a registered sale deed dated 29.9.1966. The said pur...
State of Jharkhand, Through the Superintendent of Police Vs. Umrao Roy ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-09-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR275(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The 1st respondent-writ petitioner was made an accused in G.R. Case No. 2734 of 2000 (S.T. No. 306 of 2001) for the offence under Sections 304 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. It was alleged that one deceased Teklal Mahato was driving his tanker No. BHO-5830. On 15.9.2000 on way to Konwa Bandh when the tanker reached on G.T. Road, the police patrolling party including the 1st respondent-writ petitioner gave signal for stopping the vehicle but the driver did not stop. The police patrolling party including the 1st respondent-writ petitioner chased tanker and got it stopped at Jorapppar, P.S. Barwadda, district Dhanbad. The members of police patrolling party including the 1st respondent writ petitioner pushed down the driver Teklat Mahato from the tanker and assaulted him on the road from butt of rifles and boot. At that time, the police officer sitting on the rear seat of the jeep directed the party to kill the driver as he did not stop the vehicle and had not paid a sum of Rs. ...
A.G. Office Employees Co-operative House Construction Society Ltd. and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-06-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR72(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The Managing Committee of A.G, Office Employees Cooperative House Construction Society Limited, Ranch! (Appellant No. 2) was suspended by the Secretary, Department of Cooperative, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi, vide order dated 15th December, 2003 and the Circle Officer, Sadar, Ranchi, was made Special Officer for managing the affairs of the society till further orders, pending the enquiry. It the challenged by the appellants in W.P. (C) No. 6302 of 2003. In was meantime, new Managing Committee was elected by the order of the Court. The learned Single Judge while disposed of the writ petition vide order dated 22nd January, 2004, directed the Circle Officer, Sadar, Ranchi, to take charge of the Society. The Government was directed to proceed with the enquiry and to conclude the same after hearing the parties. It was observed that till a decision is taken by the Government, on completion of the enquiry, the Managing Committee, elected under the Orders of the Court, shall remain...
Moti Hazra and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Reported in: [2006(1)JCR275(Jhr)]
ORDER1. The appellants 1 to 4 were arrayed as A-4, A-1, A-2 and A-3 respectively before the trial Judge to face the charge of murder, on the allegation that at 7 p.m. on 9.5.1985 they, in furtherance of common intention of each other, caused the death of deceased Huro Hazra while Moti Hazra shot at him with pistol.2. The learned trial Judge, accepted the prosecution version, as evidenced by the witnesses and found the appellants guilty and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life, and aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the present appeal is filed.3. The case of the prosecution as could be discerned from the oral and documentary evidence can be briefly summarized as follows :PW 1, Govind Hazra and the deceased Huro Hazra as well as Moti Hazra '(appellant No. 1) and the other three appellants are the residents of the same village. At about 6.30-7.00 p.m. on 9.5.1985 PW 3 and the deceased were proceeding in a cycle and when they were near a river, Huro Hazra, th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »