Jharkhand Court December 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.
Madan Mohan Roy Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-08-2006
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR134(Jhr)]
ORDERPermod Kohli, J.1. Petitioner is aggrieved of order No. 327 dated 11th September, 2006, repatriating him to his parent department i.e. Water Resources Department, Jharkhand, Ranchi. Petitioner, who is an Executive Engineer, was deputed to Panchayat Raj & National Rural Employment Programme (Special Division) Department (NREP) vide Notification No. 8976 dated 1st December, 2003 till further orders. He has been repatriated vide the impugned order to his parent department under the orders' of the Joint Secretary to the Government, Panchayat Raj & National Rural Employment Programme (Special Division) Department and vide Memo No. 7841 dated 11th September, 2006 he has been asked to hand over the charge to one Surajman Sharma, Technical Advisor, Rural Development (Special Division), Dumka.2. This order has been assailed on the ground that the same has not been issued with the approval of the Departmental Minister or the Chief Minister, It is also stated that normally the transfer of of...
Ajay Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-08-2006
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR98(Jhr)]
Permod Kohli, J. 1. The dispute in this writ petition relates to allotment of work of the construction of two way bridge between chain No. 486/489 of Punsai Main Canal. Petitioner has challenged allotment of contract to the Respondent No. 6 vide Memo. No. 795 dated 11th March, 2006 and is also aggrieved of its non-allotment to him.2. It is relevant to notice the factual background as emerge from the pleadings of the parties. Tenders were invited vide N.I.T. No. 1 of 2005-2006 for the construction of two way bridge between Chain No. 486/489. Last date for submission of Tenders was 30th August, 2005. Petitioner and Respondent No. 6 along with others also participated in the Tender Process. On the basis of the qualifications prescribed, three Tenders were short-listed including that of petitioner and Respondent No. 6. Incidently, rates quoted by all the three tenderers were the same and all the three Tenderers were from the district of Deoghar. Petitioner has relied upon a Government Circ...
Nageshwar Ram Dangi Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-08-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1083
Permod Kohli, J.1. Petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 07th January, 2005 and action of the Respondents, whereby last pay of the petitioner has been reduced from Rs. 10,250/- to Rs. 7500/- and consequently recoveries have been made from his retiral benefits on the ground that he did not pass the Hindi noting and drafting exam nation during his service. Petitioner retired from service on 01.08.2002 from the post of Headmaster, Government Middle School, Jharda at Katkam Sandi Block (Anchal). It is alleged that his retiral dues and his salary on the basis of the revised pay-scale has not been paid. On account of non-payment of the retiral benefits, petitioner filed W.P. (S) No. 2289 of 2004, which came to be disposed of vide order dated 28th April, 2004, wherein petitioner was asked to file a representation before the District Superintendent of Education, Hazaribagh giving the details of his claim and a direction was issued to the District Superintendent of Education, Hazaribagh to...
Devraj Sao, Vs. the State of Bihar (Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-07-2006
Reported in: I(2007)DMC735
D.K. Sinha, J.1. The instant appeal has been directed against the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by Shri Dhruv Narayan Upadhyay, 1st Additional Sessions Judge Giridih in S.T. No. 250 of 1994 on 1.7.1999 whereby and whereunder the appellant No. 1, Devraj Sao and appellant No. 3 Bundiya Devi have in on convicted under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years whereas the appellant No. 2, Umacharan Sao though was convicted under same offence but has been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for ten years. The appellants have further been sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for two years each under Section 493A of the Indian Penal Code each with stipulation of tine and rigorous imprisonment for one year each for their conviction under Section 201 I.P.C.2. The recourse of law was set on motion on the written report of the informant, Rameshwar Sao (P.W.5) presented before the Officer-incharg...
Gunadhar Oraon and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-07-2006
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR136(Jhr)]
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.1.2001 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Seraikella in Sessions Trial No. 60/96, whereby and whereunder the learned Sessions Judge held the appellants guilty under Sections 302/34, IPC and sentenced them to serve RI for life and further found them guilty under Sections 323/34, IPC and sentenced them to serve RI for six months. However, sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. Factual matrix leading to this appeal are as follows:In the morning of 17.5.1995 the appellants alongwith Sukhram and Kalipado were ploughing the land situated in the east of the house of the informant, PW 8 Chhotu Oraon. As the land in question belonged to the informant, he alongwith deceased went at the PO, the disputed land and forbade them. This led to assault by the appellants with two others upon the informant and deceased. According to him, appellant Khoka gave a blow with axe upon the head of ...
Mahamaya Chemicals Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-06-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Jhar61; 2007(2)BLJR876; [2007(1)JCR555(Jhr)]
ORDERPermod Kohli, J.1. Petitioner is aggrieved of the order No. 123 dated 25th August, 2006, blacklisting the petitioner and the order dated 09.09.2006 cancelling the work already allotted. Petitioner is a proprietorship concern duly registered with the District Industrial Centre, Ranchi and is engaged in manufacturing and processing of unslacked lime etc. Petitioner participated in the bid and was declared as a successful bidder for supply of the unslacked lime. A formal agreement is said to have been executed, which was in operation till 30th September, 2006. Vide impugned order No. 123 dated 25th August, 2006, issued under order of the Under Secretary, Drinking Water and Sanitation Department, Government of Jharkhand, Ranchi petitioner has been blacklisted and has been deprived of all future contracts with a further direction not to allow execution of current work. This blacklisting order has been passed on the ground that the representative of the petitioner entered into the offic...
Lallu Munda Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-06-2006
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR492(Jhr)]
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.7.2002 passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner, FTC, Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 439/99/T.R. No. 74/2002, whereby and whereunder the learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi held the appellant guilty under Section 302, IPC and convicted and sentenced him to undergo RI for life.2. The factual matrix leading to this appeal are that in the night of 14.2.1999 the informant Hissi Mundain was cooking food in her house while the deceased, her husband Lakhan Munda was sitting in the room on a mat. It is further stated that two small kids were also sleeping there, when all of a sudden appellant Lallu Munda, cousin brother of the deceased, entered into the room carrying a dagger in his hand and gave the fatal blow with the dagger on the left side of his chest. The informant rushed to help her husband but in the meantime Lallu Munda fled away carrying the dagger. The informant raised alarm an...
Dr. Bhuneshwar Sahay Vs. State of Jharkhand Through S.P.C.B.i.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-05-2006
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR186(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner, Dr. Bhuneshwar Sahay, has preferred this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for setting aside the order dated 4.8.2006 passed by Shri J.K.N. Tiwari, Special Judge, Ranchi in R.C. Case No. 43(A)/96 and for further direction that the main Investigating Officer who has been examined as PW 49 be recalled and the petitioner be permitted to examine him.2. The petitioner by an application dated 23.2.2006 had earlier requested the Court below not to examine the Investigating Officer prior to the completion of the examination of the other material witnesses to be produced on behalf of the prosecution in respect of the allotment and sanction on the allegation of illegal withdrawal of fund from the Treasury. But surprisingly, no order was passed by the Court below in-spite of the date fixed for orders on the said application of the petitioner and the prosecution was permitted to examine the Investigating Officer inspite of the protes...
Binod Yadav and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-04-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR86(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. Both the appeals, arising out of same judgment, were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Both the appeals are directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.9.2000' and 25.9.2000 passed by the learned 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Koderma in Sessions Trial No. 328/99, whereby and whereunder the learned Sessions Judge held all the appellants guilty under Section 302 IPC and sentenced appellants Chhoti Yadav, Binod Yadav, Baijnath Yadav @ Gulli, Mahadeo Yadav and Mosst. Tukani Devi to undergo RI for life. Appellant Mahadeo Yadav further stands sentenced to undergo RI for two years under Section 324 IPC and RI for six months for the offence under Section 323 IPC. Appellant Chhoti Yadav is also sentenced to undergo RI for six months for the offence under Section 323 IPC. However, sentences were directed to run concurrently.3. The factual matrix leading to these appeals are that in the afternoon of Fi...
Qayum Ansari @ Abdul Qayum Ansari, Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkha ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-04-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR93(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J. 1. The appellants {in Criminal Appeal No. 237 of 1999(R) and Criminal Appeal No. 238 of 1999(R)} on being tried together, have been found and held guilty for the offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and appellant Md. Tahir Ansari in Criminal No. 238 of 1999(R) has been further found and held guilty for the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years, by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Chatra by common judgment dated 10.6.1999 and 16.6.1999 in Sessions Trial No. 277 of 1997 | 222 of 1997. However, all the sentences passed against appellant Md. Tahir Ansari were ordered to run concurrently. As all the appeals arise out of the same judgment, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Factual matrix leading to these appeals is that long-standing dispute between the deceased and the appellants has resul...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »