Jharkhand Court May 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.
Teophil Tirkey Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-15-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ4501
1. The accused appeals.2. The appellant, Teophil Tirkey, was acused of the murder of Anjela Khariain at noon of 17-3-1994. The trial Judge, accepting the accusation made in the charge against the appellant, found him guilty under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for which he was directed to suffer imprisonment for life. The appeal is against the said conviction and sentence.3. The deceased, Anjela Khariain, is the daughter of PW-3, Martin Kharia. PW-2, Sushma Khariain, is the younger sister of the deceased and at the relevant period, PW- was studying and staying in the hostel. PW-1, Balandina Khariain is the mother of the deceased and wife of PW-3. It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased and the appellant were loving each other and they were also having physical relationship. The deceased was studying in a College and was aged about 20 years. Sometime prior to date of the occurrence, the appellant had taken the deceased to his house. Therefore, a Panchayati was convened...
Gobra Pradhan and anr. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-15-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR333(Jhr)]
1. The appellants were arrayed as A-1 and A-2 in Sessions Trial No. 44 of 1993 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Seraikella. They have been charges under Section 302 read with 34, IPC which was framed against them with an allegation that at 8 a.m. on 17.8.1992, the second appellant Chaitan Pradhan @ Mangru Pradhan beat the deceased with a spade and that the first accused, Gobra Pradhan, who is the father of the second appellant, shared the common intention.The trial Judge finding the appellants guilty as charged, sentenced each one of them to imprisonment for life and aggrieved by the said order of conviction and sentence, the present appeal is filed.2. PW 3 Champa Pradhan is the wife of the deceased, Mahendra Pradhan. PW 1 Bharat Pradhan as the brother of the deceased. There was a dispute pending between the deceased and the appellants regarding a landed property and a civil suit was instituted at Seraikella. The suit was pending on the date of occurrence.3. On 17.8.1992 at about ...
Bishwanath Kalindi and anr. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-15-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR326(Jhr)]
1. The appellants, two in number, challenge their conviction and sentence in this appeal. They were tried and convicted under Section 302 read with 34, IPC. They were sentenced to imprisonment for life. Hence, the appeal.2. The allegation against them is that Bishwanth Kalindi, the first appellant sharing the common intention of Shatrughan Kalindi, second appellant, stabbed the deceased, Mantu Kalindi at about 5.30 p.m. on 12.2.1996 during a quarrel.3. The facts are as follows:PW 6, Manju Kalindi is the wife of the deceased, Mantu Kalindi. The deceased, Mantu Kalindi and PW 6, Manju Kalindi were residing in the same village where the appellants were also residing. The first appellant is said to be the son of the second appellant. At about 5.30 p.m. on 12.2.1996, the deceased went out of the house and sometime thereafter, PW 6 heard the voice of her husband. She came out of the house and saw her husband quarreling with Shatrughan Kalindi, the second appellant. While the quarrel was goin...
Bishnu Bhagat Vs. Pushpa Devi
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Jhar117; [2006(3)JCR457(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The instant appeal has been placed before this Bench for deciding a question as to whether first appeal arising out of original decree is necessary to be placed for hearing under Order 41 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. The instant appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Simdega in Judicial Separation Case No. 9/95 dismissing the case filed by the petitioner/appellant under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act.3. When the appeal was listed before the Bench for admission a question arose as to whether the appeal ought to be sent up for admission in terms of Order 41 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure or it should automatically be taken on file by the Registrar of this Court in exercise of power conferred under Rule 205 of the High Court of Jharkhand Rules. A Bench of this Court (P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J. as he then was) answered the question by order dated 2.8.2004 holding that the appeals, w...
R.T. Singh and M.K. Sinha Vs. the State of Jharkhand and Shri Umsesh P ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ4494; [2006(111)FLR381]; [2006(3)JCR33(Jhr)]; (2006)IIILLJ878Jhar
D.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioners herein have preferred this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of their criminal prosecution including the order impugned dated 26.8.2002 whereby and whereunder the C.J.M., Jamshedpur took cognizance of the offence under Section 22A of Minimum Wages Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in C/2 Case No. 2006/2002 pending in the Court of Miss Shweta Kumari, Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur.2. A complaint case vide C/2 Case No. 2006/2002 was filed by the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 herein against the petitioners and others for the alleged violation of Section 12(1) and 18 of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 and Rules 21(4), 22, 25(2), 26(1), 26(2), 26(5) and 26 of the Minimum Wages Rules, 1950 on the backdrop that when the O.P.No. 2 on 15.7.2002 inspected M/s Graduate Engineers Hostel, TELCO, Plaza Area, TELCO in M-53, Jamshedpur along with other witnesses and also inspected the Bharat Special Security, the irregularities were found in ...
Alice Educational Trust Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR342(Jhr)]
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner Alice Education Trust, which runs an institute, known as 'Alice Institute of Technology, Angara, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand)'-hereinafter to be referred as the Institute', to set aside the order, contained in Ref. No. Perm/69-73 dated 7th June, 2005, issued by the Ranchi University, Ranchi, whereby and whereunder, the registration in regard to 22 students, admitted in the Institute for the session 2003-2007 in the 1st Year Engineering Programme, has been kept in abeyance till the clearance is obtained from the State. So far as other 44 students, admitted in the Institution in 1st Year Engineering Programme, during the said session 2003-2007 on the recommendation of Jharkhand Combined Entrance Competitive Examination Board (hereinafter to be referred as 'J.C.E.C.E.B.') are concerned, their registration have been allowed, as detailed in the enclosure, attached to the said letter dated 7th June, 2005.Further p...
Nausad Sk. Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: I(2007)DMC480; [2006(4)JCR387(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. By Court This appeal arises against the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.11.1998 and 12.11.1998 respectively passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pakur in Sessions Case No. 28 of 1992/26 of 1997 whereby and whereunder, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 304-B and Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years for the offence under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years for the offence under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. By the same Judgment, the learned Trial Court acquitted the other two accused namely Ezna Khatoon and Nawera @ Maveera Bibi from the charges holding that the prosecution failed to .establish the charges against them.2. In short the prosecution case is that the F.I.R. was lodged on 12...
Sk. Suleman, Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ4510
D.P. Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.1.2001 passed in Sessions Trial No. 176/91/185/98, whereby and whereunder the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Godda held the appellants guilty under Sections 148/452 IPC and sentenced them to undergo RI for three years and seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment, to further undergo RI for one year and under Sections 307/34 IPC to undergo RI for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment to further undergo RI for two years.2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that one Nandkishore Yadav was sleeping on his veranda in the night of 27th August, 1990 when he saw Sk. Suleman, Sk. Sarafat, Sk. Sukhari and Sk. Manowar were going towards the field along with electric wire. It is further stated that when the informant asked them where they were going with electric wire, all of them came inside the verandah and other accused ...
Mukul Kumar Vs. National Project Constructions Corporation Ltd. and or ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR512(Jhr)]
ORDERPermod Kohli, J.1. Petitioner was serving as an Executive Engineer (Civil) in the respondent No. 1-Company. The respondent-Company formulated a Scheme for voluntary retirement for its employees as is notified by a Circular dated 3rd of April, 1994. Petitioner applied for his voluntary retirement on 28th of March, 2000 (Annexure-1) under the aforesaid scheme. Since no decision was taken, he sent a reminder dated 3rd of August, 2000. The respondent-Company vide Communication dated 20th of February, 2002 asked the Junior Officer, NPCC Ltd. to intimate to the petitioner that his request for voluntary retirement can be accepted subject to an undertaking that his dues will be paid on receipt of V.R.S. funds from the Government and that he will not go for litigation and also not claim any interest on the delayed payment. On receipt of the aforesaid communication, (copy whereof was also addressed to the petitioner), he submitted an undertaking as desired by the respondent-Company on 22nd ...
S.S. Mishra and anr. Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-12-2006
Reported in: [2006(3)JCR509(Jhr)]
ORDERPermod Kohli, J.1. Petitioner's father was in service of the respondent No. 1 le. Steel Authority of India Limited, Bokaro Steel Plant, Bokaro. He retired as Senior Scurity Inspector on 28th February, 1991. Petitioner's son was also granted appointment in Bokaro Steel Plant, Bokaro as T.O.T. on 18th of September, 1990 i.e. prior to the retirement of petitioner No. 1. Since petitioner No. 2 was residing in the same house, which was allotted to the petitioner No. 1 by the respondent No. 1-Company, petitioner No. 1 made a request for allotment of the quarter under his occupation in the name of petitioner No. 2 vide his application dated 28th January, 1991. Prayer of the petitioner was refused. However, petitioners remained in occupation of the quarter No. 3-A/91 D Type. The respondent No. 1 Company initiated eviction proceedings under the provisions of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupancy) Act, 1971 against the petitioner No. 1. The Estate Officer ordered the eviction....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »