Jharkhand Court November 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.
Berga Doraiburu Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-07-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ1982; [2007(2)JCR146(Jhr)]
D.G.R. Patnaik, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 3.12.1999 and corresponding sentence passed by the Sessions Judge, Singhbhum West at Chaibasa, whereby the appellant Berga Doraiburu was convicted for she offence under Section 376 of the Indin Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 7 years.2. Brief facts of the case, which was registered on the basis of the fardbeyan of the prosecutrix (PW3) on 11.1.1991, is that in the morning of 11.1.1991 at about 8.00 AM, the prosecutrix who claims to be aged 11 years had gone to ease herself at the bank of river Chutuibir. The present appellant accosted her and after felling her on the ground, he committed rape on her forcibly. When she wanted to raise alarm, he allegedly pressed her throat and had also shut her mouth. The victim thereafter came to her house and narrated the entire incident to her parents and other members of the family. Her father Atmanand Honhaga took her to the police station wh...
Abhishek Shanu Vs. Santosh Kumar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-07-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR233(Jhr)]
ORDER1. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the affidavits, memo of appeal, petitions and counter affidavits as also the Annexures. It is clear that the amendment which came into existence on 9th December, 2002 would very much apply to the institutions even though these institutions have been established by the State Government. It is quite unfortunate to see that the students have been misled through the Principal of the Institution, who applied for admission and some of the students have studied for one year. The students, who have completed one year, have now approached this Court through this writ petition, seeking permission to write at the examination. In view of our conclusion that the establishment of any college in the case of without prior permission of the Government of India as per the amended Act, which came to be introduced on 9th December, 2002, is not valid, we are unable to give relief to the petitioner and equally we are unable to hold that ...
Babu Ram Mahto Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-07-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR253(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.IA. No. 2485 of 20061. This application has been filed for substituting the heirs of sole petitioner who died on 10.7.2002 leaving behind the heirs mentioned in para 2 of the application.2. Heard.3. Substitution petition is allowed. The heirs mentioned in para 2 may be substituted.4. IA No. 2485 of 2006 is disposed of.W.P. (C) No. 3094 of 2002.5. Petitioner has challenged the order dated 24.5.1996 passed by respondent No. 2, the Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna in Ceiling Pre-emption Case No. 354 of 1990 (Annexure-5), by which the revision filed by the petitioner was dismissed, and also the order dated 12.4.1990, passed by respondent No. 3, Additional Collector, Land Ceiling, Hazaribagh in Revenue Ceiling Appeal No. 33 of 1989 (Annexure-4), by which he set aside the order dated 15.9.1989, passed by respondent No. 4 in Pre-emption Case No. 10 of 1987-88.6. Petitioner had filed this writ application for preemption with regard to plot No. 465, Khata No. 13, are...
Suresh Munda Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-07-2006
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR103(Jhr)]
Dilip Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present Cr. Appeal has been directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh in Sessions Trial No. 451/96 on 6th May, 1999 and 7th May, 1999 respectively whereby and whereunder the sole appellant Suresh Munda was convicted under Section 304B I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years therein.2. The prosecution story is in a narrow compass. The informant Bechan Pahan by presenting a written report before Mandu (Kuju) Police alleged that in June, 1994 his daughter Pairo Devi (since deceased) was married to the appellant Suresh Munda and after the marriage the appellant had been assaulting and extended torture to his wife for dowry and other reasons. On 22.7.96 the informant was communicated that his daughter Pairo Devi was seriously ill in her matrimonial home. When the informant went there with son and other witnesses, he found the dead body of his daughter Pa...
Kishor Kumar Mantri @ Kishor Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-07-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR57(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The present Cr. Revision is directed against the order dated 22.6.2006 passed by Shri Anand Prakash, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi whereby and whereunder the petition filed under Section 239, Cr PC by the petitioner in Forest Case No. 175/1998 for his discharge was rejected.2. The brief fact of the case is that the Forester of Tupudana Forest Check Post presented a written complaint before the C.J.M., Ranchi alleging inter alia, that he had intercepted a bus No. B.R. 14P/1111 carrying the planks of Gamhar illegally and on demand by the forest officials, no document was produced in respect of transportation of the planks and for such reason the bus with the planks loaded thereon was seized under Section 52 of Indian Forest. (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1989 and the driver of the bus was directed to park the bus by the side of the check post. While the complainant was preparing the seizure list the driver of the vehicle instead of parking the vehicle, speeded the...
Surajdeo Manjhi Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-07-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR138(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The Cr. Revision Application is directed against the order dated 17.5.2004 passed by Shri Awadhesh Nandan, 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Palamau in Cr. Appeal No. 88/1995 whereby and whereunder the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed against the petitioner Surajdeo Manjhi by Shri Krishna Gopal Dwivedi, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Daltonganj in T.R. No. 236/95 arising out of G.R. No. 499/1992 was upheld and affirmed. The petitioner was convicted under Sections 279 and 304-A, IPC and he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and two years respectively on each count.2. The prosecution story in brief is that one Laldeo Yadav succumbed his injuries under the wheels of Truck No. BRO 3422 which was driven by the petitioner.3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that there was no eye-witness of the occurrence and trial Court as well as the first appellate Court failed to take into consideration of suc...
Radhasao @ Radhey Shyam Prasad and Mahendra Thakur Vs. State of Jharkh ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-06-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR7(Jhr)]
1. Both the appellants on being tried, have been found and held guilty for the offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code by common judgment dated 30.8.2000 passed by the Sessions Judge, Palamau in Sessions Trial No. 142 of 1999 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life each and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- each, in default thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. As both the appeals arise out of the same judgment, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Brief facts leading to their conviction are that in the afternoon of 14.3.1998, informant Kayum Sah of village Naya Bazar was passing through Bazar and the appellants wanted to put colour on him to which he protested then appellant Mahendra Thakur asked appellant Radhey Shyam Prasad to pour patrol on him. Further stated that appellant Radhey Shyam Prasad brought patrol kept in a container from his shop and threw it on his back, after which appellan...
Chandra Bhushan Dubey Vs. Uniion of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-06-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR263(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Pending main writ petition [W.P. (PIL) No. 370 of 2003], IA. No. 399 of 2005 was filed requesting this Court to stay the investigation of the Fodder Scam cases. This Court, on 9.12.2005, rejected the said prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner, keeping in view that no order was required to be passed because this Court was earlier monitoring the investigation of the case, in view of the order of the Supreme Court. In that order, it was also observed that this Court is now supervising the disposal of such cases under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. From the reading of the aforesaid order, it is-manifestly clear that the request for stay of the criminal proceeding made through IA. No. 399 of 2005 was rejected. Feeling aggrieved with the said order, the petitioner chose to file S.L.P. in the Supreme Court being S.L.P. (Cr.) No. 6152/2006. The Supreme Court after hearing counsel for the parties, ultimately permitted the petitioner, as requested by him, to withdraw...
Tata Steel Limited Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-03-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR447(Jhr)]; (2007)8VST236(Jharkh)
1. 5.11.2006: Petitioner has challenged the reassessment order passed in Case No. 491 of 2005-06 (Annexure-12) under the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act (C.S.T. for short) relating to the period 1993-94 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (respondent No. 5) and also the order dated 19.7.2006 (Annexure-14) passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeal) (respondent No. 4) dismissing the appeal against the aforesaid order-Annexure 12.2. Dr. Debi Pal appearing for the petitioner submitted that a concluded assessment order passed in 2001 under the C.S.T. has been reopened and reassessment order has been passed without serving a valid notice under Section 19 of the Bihar Finance Act and, as such, the impugned orders are without jurisdiction.3. On the other hand, Mr. Jhunjhunwala, appearing for the respondents, submitted that the impugned orders were passed after serving notice on the petitioner pursuant to and for giving effect to the order of remand ...
Md. NizamuddIn Quareshi Vs. Khatibur Rub and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Nov-03-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR676(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 20.7.2006 passed by Additional District Judge, Chatra in Title Appeal No. 03 of 2003 whereby he allowed amendment petition filed by defendants-respondents at the appellate stage.2. The plaintiff-petitioner and respondent No. 12 filed a suit being. Title Suit No. 04 of 1993 for a decree for specific performance of contract directing the respondents to execute and register the sale deed in respect of the land specified in the schedule of the plaint.3. Plaintiffs case, inter alia, is that the suit property was held and possessed by the maternal grandmother of the defendants who in her life time gifted the property to her daughter Bibi Jamila Khatoon (mother of the defendants). Bibi Jamila Khatoon accepted the gift and came in possession of the suit property. She died leaving behind six sons and five daughters who inherited the suit property. Further case of the plainti...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »