Jharkhand Court March 2006 Judgments
Kanhaiya Prasad Singh Vs. Bijay Krishna Sharma S/O Sri Prasant Singh,
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-31-2006
Reported in: III(2006)ACC690; 2006ACJ2453; [2006(3)JCR97(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, at the instance of the owner of the vehicle, is directed against the judgment and award dated 4.9.02, passed by Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Tribunal, Saraikela, whereby he has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,25,000/- in Compensation Case No. 14/91 and directed that out of the said amount a sum of Rs. 15,000/- shall be paid by the Insurance Company and rest of the amount shall be paid by the appellant being owner of the vehicle.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:Respondent No. l-claimant was returning from Ranchi to Jamshedpur in Bus No. BHZ 4444. It is alleged that the driver of the bus was driving the vehicle very rashly and negligently and it dashed against a truck bearing No. BHV-8786 standing of the road due to which several passengers of the bus including the claimant sustained grievous injuries. The claimant was admitted to Tata hospital for treatment but later on referred to Dr. B. Mukhopadhya...
Tag this Judgment!Anmol More Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-31-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR103(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for setting aside the order dated 7.10.2005 passed by the Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Cr. Rev. No. 196 of 2005 arising out of the order impugned dated 8.8.2005 passed in C.P. Case No. 750 of 2005 by the Court of Sri A.K. Mishra Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad whereby and whereunder the trial Court had rejected the prayer of the petitioner for dispensation of his personal attendance under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the present case cognizance of the offence was taken only under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code on 24.5.2005 against the petitioner. On the receipt of the summons, a prayer through his lawyer for dispensation of his personal attendance under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was made on the ground that his left leg was amputated above his knee and he would suffer ...
Tag this Judgment!Balbir Singh and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-31-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR93(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioners have preferred this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the order impugned dated 2.7.2003, in C.P. Case No. 355 of 2002 whereby cognizance of the offence under Section 406/420/34 of the Indian Penal Code was taken against them. It is further prayed that the entire criminal proceedings, presently pending in the Court of Sri Uttam Anand, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class. Chas at Bokaro with respect to the above complaint case be quashed.2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that opposite party No. 2 filed complaint case being C.P. Case No. 355 of 2002 against the petitioners alleging that the petitioner No. 2 had entered into written agreement with the opposite party No. 2 for sale of her property situated at Mouza No. 30 appertaining of Khata No. 566, plot No. 7013, measuring an area of 3567 sq. ft. against Ekrarnama and by way of advance, the opposite party No. 2 paid a sum of 51,000/- to the petitioner No. 1 in...
Tag this Judgment!Akhileshwar Prasad and ors. Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-31-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR418(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The petitioners of all the abovementioned writ petitions were in the service of the erstwhile Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna (hereinafter to be referred as 'Erstwhile State Electricity Board1). They retired prior to creation of Jharkhand State Electricity Board, Ranchi (hereinafter to be referred as (J.S.E.B.) and present Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna (hereinafter to be referred as 'B.S.E.B.') i.e. prior to '1st April, 2001. They had been getting their pensions after retirement but after the creation of the said separate Board i.e. J.S.E.B. and 'B.S.E.B., payments or pensions have been suddenly stopped since June, 2005. The two Boards are now passing buck on one another for the financial liability to be born in paying previous and other dues of the petitioners. However, both the Board have admitted that the petitioners are entitled to get pension and other benefits as they are retired employees of the erstwhile State Electricity Board. The only...
Tag this Judgment!Ganesh Chandra Mandal, Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-31-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR508(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. All the three appeals arise out of the same impugned judgment and as such, they were taken up together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The three appellants namely Ganesh Chandra Mandal, Ram Gopal Goenka and Kamal Kishore Swarankar and one other accused namely Mahavir Narmolia (since dead, who died during the pendency of the trial) were charged for the offence under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code for assaulting Sanjay Chaudhary, the informant (PW 5) with such intention and knowledge that the act caused by them would cause death of Sanjay Chaudhary and they committed the said offence in furtherance of common intention for voluntarily causing hurt to Sanjay Chaudhary by means of lathi. heated rod, burning cigarettes and heated chholni3. Learning 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka, by the impugned judgment dated 17.1.1998, convicted all the three appellants for the offence under Sections 307/34 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code and...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Santosh Ranjan Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-31-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR191(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner, Mrs. Santosh Ranjan has preferred this petition under Section 482 of the Code of criminal Procedure for quashing the entire criminal proceedings against her including the order dated 12.11.2003 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella whereby cognizance of the offence has been taken in C/2 Case No. 70 of 2003, presently pending in the Court of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella for the offence under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. 1954.2. The brief fact of the case-is that on 6.9.2003 the Food Inspector, Jamshedpur has collected Shankar Brand Gram Besan and Turmeric Powder from M/s TISCO Adityapur Complex Growth Shop Canteen, Gamharia, Seraikella, Kharsawan and it was sent to the public analyst. It was found by the public analyst, vide report dated 29.9.2003 that the Besan was misbranded, cm the basis of which prosecution report dated 5.11.2003 of the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Se...
Tag this Judgment!Umakant Yadav Vs. Ramesh Kumar Bajaj and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-30-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar74; [2006(2)JCR439(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. Heard the parties.2. In this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner, who is defendant-appellant in the Court-below has prayed for quashing the order dated 16.9.2005 passed by learned 5th Additional District Judge, Godda in Title Appeal (Eviction) No. 1/05 whereby he has rejected the petition filed by the petitioner under Order XLI, Rule 27(aa) (b) of the Code of Civil Procedure.3. Plaintiff-respondents filed a suit for eviction being Title Suit (Eviction) No. 5/2001 and the said eviction suit was decreed. Petitioner then preferred Title Appeal being Title Appeal (Eviction) No. 10/05. Defence taken by the defendant- petitioner in the suit was that he is not a tenant rather lie is the owner of the suit premises on the strength of an agreement to sell executed by the original land holder on receiving part of the consideration money. Defendant's further case is that the landlady now deceased also received balance consideration amount a...
Tag this Judgment!Sakhiya Kumari Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-30-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR204(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. Petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 31.3.1987 (Annexure 6) passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Khunti (respondent No. 4) in S.A.R. Case No. 2 of 1986-87 and also the order 10.9.1996 (Annexure 8) passed by the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Division, Ranchi (respondent No. 2) in S.A.R. Revision No. 87 of 1989 confirming the said order.2. By the said orders, the application for restoration of land filed by respondent No. 5 and his father under Section 71A of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was allowed.3. Their case was that they have been dispossessed by petitioner from the lands in question which belonged to their agnate Mostt. Mangari Mundain. The land in question is 0.91 acres of land arising out of Revisional Survey Plot No. 75 and 0.79 acres of land out of the Revisional Survey Plot No. 79 of Khata No. 231 under Khewat No. 16 situated at village Rolagutu, P.S. Karra, District Ranchi.4. Petitioner's case w...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Mahtab Alam Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-30-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR494(Jhr)]
R.K. Merathia, J.1. Heard Mr. Rajiv Nandan Prasad, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. P. Modi, learned G.P.-I appearing for the State.2. Petitioner had prayed for quashing the order contained in Memo No. 29(11) dated 24.2.1995 issued by the Director-in-Chief, Health Service, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna (Annexure 1), by which the earlier order contained in Memo No. ll/T4-23/93-576(II) dated 28.7.1994 issued by Sri G.R. Patverdhan, Secretary-cum-Director-in-Chief, Health Service, Government of Bihar, Patna (Annexure 10) was cancelled.3. Petitioner's case is that he was working since 10.12.1978 and his service was confirmed by the order of Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Nalanda on 1.4.1982 as contained in Memo No. 3237 dated 2.12.1982 (Annexure 2). Petitioner underwent training pursuant to the advertisement and thereafter, by order as contained in Memo No. 1455/TB/Patna dated 2.11.1985 (Annexure 4), Doctor A.A. Mallick posted him and ...
Tag this Judgment!Karu Mian and Darbari Mian Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-29-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR484(Jhr)]
1. The appellants, two in number, who were arrayed as Al and A2 before the Sessions Judge, were tried for an offence under Section 323, 380 and 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. The allegation against them is that at about 9 or 10 p.m. on 6.6.1981, they caused injury to Prakash Tanti @ Prakash Das, as a result of which he died on 10.6.1981 at Sadar Hospital, Dumka and that during the course of same transaction, they also caused injuries on P.W.7 Ishwar Tanti, son of the deceased, and removed certain articles from the house of P.W.7, who was Headmaster of a school.2. The Trial Judge, though found the appellants guilty under Section 323 and 380 I.P.C, did not award any separate sentence, but sentenced each of them to imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. The above appeal is against the said conviction and sentence.3. The accused and the deceased were inimical towards each other on account of a dispute over a property. Proceedings were also initiated under Sect...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »