Jharkhand Court April 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.
Bhuban Mahto and anr. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-04-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR339(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ petition, petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 19.01.2006 passed by the Member, Board of Revenue in revision, setting aside the order of the Appellate Court and rejecting the claim of preemption of the petitioners made under Section 16(3) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act') The appellate order has been set aside on the ground that the purchaser of the land has got adjoining land and a corner of the land touches the vended land. The petitioners have assailed the order of the Member, Board of Revenue on the ground that larger area of the petitioners' land adjoins the vended land whereas only a small portion of the land of the purchaser-respondent Nos. 8 and 9 is adjacent to the vended land and comparatively, the petitioners have got better right of preemption.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Appellate Court h...
The State of Jharkhand Vs. Tara Sardar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-03-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR434(Jhr)]
1. The accused appeals.2. The appellant, on being tried for an offence under Section 302 I.P.C for causing the death of Anthony Topno, was found guilty by the Trial Judge, for which he was sentenced to death. The appellant aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence has preferred the above appeal, while the Death Reference is by the Sessions Judge for the confirmation of death sentence by this Court and both are being disposed of by the following common judgment.3. The allegation against the appellant is that at 11.30 a.m. on 23.1.2005, he caused the death of Anthony Topno, son of P.W.4 Marshal Topno, by cutting his neck.4. At about 11.30 a.m. on 23.1.2005, while P.W.4 Marshal Topno was taking his lunch at his house, his son Lawrence Topno, who is the elder brother of the deceased Anthony Topno, rushed to him and told him that the appellant has cut the deceased to death. P.W.4 ran to the house and found the dead body of his son Anthony Topno inside the house of the appellant. P.W.4 r...
State of Jharkhand Vs. Khudu Karmkar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-03-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR497(Jhr)]
N. Dhinakar, C.J.1. The appellants 1 to 6 were arrayed as A/5, A/1, A/2, A/3, A/4 and A/6 before the Sessions Court and in this judgment, they will be referred to as A/1 to A/6, in the order they were arrayed before the Sessions Judge, for the sake of convenience. 2. They were tried under Sections 302/34, 201 and 120B of the Indian Code on the allegation that between 19.4.2002 and 22.4.2002, they in pursuance of a conspiracy hatched, caused the death of Manju Kumari by inflicting injury on her body and later threw the body in a field at village Antapur Moulana Bahiyar. The learned trial judge, on the evidence adduced, both oral and documentary, while finding the 1st appellant (A/5) guilty, as charged, sentenced him to death under Section 302/34 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. He was also sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. A/1, A/2, A/3, A/4 and A/6 were sentenced to imprisonment for life and each one of them was a...
Alois Xalxo and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-03-2006
Reported in: [2006(2)JCR323(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The petitioners have filed this writ petition challenging the order of punishment dated 19.2.2003 passed by the District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi whereby petitioners' services have been terminated after holding a departmental enquiry. 2. Petitioners' case, as stated in the writ petition, are as follows:Petitioners were appointed as teachers in 1979-80 in St. Aloysius Boys' Middle School, Mander, Ranchi which is aided minority institution. In 2003 petitioners were put under suspension on certain charges and a departmental proceeding was initiated against them. After holding departmental inquiry the charges were found to be proved by the Enquiry Officer and, thereafter order of termination of the services of the petitioners was issued. It is stated by the petitioners that the enquiry officer had asked them to explain the charges in one sitting and they were not allowed to produce their witnesses nor they were allowed to cross-examine the witnesses produce...
T. Mukherjee and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-03-2006
Reported in: [2006(111)FLR553]; [2006(4)JCR122(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Since the parties have already completed pleadings and as such, this application is being disposed of at the state of 'Admission' itself.2. In this application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the order taking cognizance dated 19.3.2004 as well as the entire criminal proceedings against them in C-2 Case No. 1187 of 2004 whereby, the cognizance for an offence under Section 92 of the Factories Act, 1948 has been taken against the petitioners.3. The short point which has been urged by Mr. Mazumdar is that Section 106 of the Factories Act prescribes a period of limitation of three months only for filing a complaint for commission of the offence under Section 92 of the Factories Act and the period of three months has to be counted from the alleged date of occurrence.4. In the present case, though the date of occurrence is 3.9.2003 but the complaint was filed on 19.3.2004 i.e. much after the period of limitation of 90 days as prescribed under Section 1...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›