Jharkhand Court August 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.
Anirudh Singh Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-18-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR607(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard.2. The prayer of the petitioner in this application is for directing the respondent s to pay the retiral dues by way of full pension, leave encashment amount and refund of Rs. 25061/- (twenty five thousand and sixty one only), which according to the petitioner was illegally deducted from his pensionary benefit. Further prayer of the petitioner is to direct the respondent to consider and promotion to the post of U.D. Assistant w.e.f. 1.4.1974, to the post of Jr. Selection Grade w.e.f. 1.4.1981 and Super Selection Grade w.e.f. 1.5.1986 and Senior Selection Grade w.e.f. 1.9.1992.3. The case of the petitioner, as it appears that without any notice or proceeding, the amount of Rs. 25061/- (twenty five thousand and sixty one only) was wrongly deducted from his pensionary benefit, by the authority concerned and the petitioner has been denied his claim for promotion without any reason.4. Mr. Ram Kishore Prasad, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the ...
Hamid Mian Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-18-2006
Reported in: [2007(1)JCR43(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. This appeal arises against the judgment dated 24.2.2004 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, 1st Fast Track Court. Giridih, in S.T. Case No. 148/ 2001 whereby the learned trial Court convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 376, IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period three months.2. The present case, in short, is that on 1.4.2000 at about 10.00 p.m., the appellant, Hamid Mian, was hiding himself in front of the house of the informant, Saliman Khatoon (PW 6). When the informant came out of her house to urinate, the appellant caught hold of her and thereafter thrashed her on the ground and then forcibly committed rape on her. The informant raised hulla, on which her husband, Kurban Mian (PW 5), having a Torch in his hand, came out of the house and in the Torch light, he saw that Hamid Mian was fleeing away. Th...
Diwakar Prasad Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-18-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1775; [2007(4)JCR31(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. The appellant along with one Moharlal Mirdha were tried for the charge under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC) whereas, Moharlal Mirdha was acquitted, the appellant has been convicted under Section 395 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years.2. The fact which led to this appeal in brief is that on 19/20.2.2001 at about 11:30 PM. Pitamber Mandal, the younger son of the informant, Jiyadhar Mandal, who was sleeping in the Varandah called him and requested to open the door saying that the miscreants are threatening to kill him and his wife. The informant at first did not open the door, he peeped through the window and saw that 5/6 miscreants were catching hold of his son and were assaulting him. The informant' raised alarm but no-body turned up. The miscreants then brought kerosene oil and poured on his son, who cried that the miscreants were going to set fire on him if the door is not opened. When the informant opened ...
Yogendra Choudhary @ Sukhai Choudhary @ Sukai Pd. and Surendra Choudha ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-17-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR2413
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17.12.2002 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in S.T.No. 368/93 whereby though the appellants have been acquitted of the charges framed under Sections 307/34 I.P.C, they have been found guilty under Sections 324/34/342 I.P.C and have been sentenced to undergo R.I for six months along with a fine of Rs. 500/- each for the offence under Section 342 I.P.C and R.I for one year along with a fine of Rs. 500/- each for the offence under Section 324 I.P.C. Both the sentences are to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 9.5.92 at about 12 noon Arvind Kr. (PW-1) one of the informant's son was taken by Surendra Choudhary (appellant No. 2) to his house. Allegedly Arvind Kr. (PW-1) had stolen his bulb and for that he was tied down and assaulted with fists and slaps. When the informant went to beg release of her son PW-1, she ...
Ram Dhani Sao and Basanti Devi Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-17-2006
Reported in: I(2007)DMC453; [2006(4)JCR480(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The three accused persons namely Ram Dhani Sao, Basanti Devi and Sudamia Devi were charged for the offence under Section 304(B) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for committing down death of the deceased Renu Devi.During trial, the 3rd accused Sudamia Devi died. By the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 19.02.2004 and 23.02.2004 respectively passed in Sessions Trial No. 333 of 1993, the Additional sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-Vth, Giridih convicted the rest of the two accused persons namely Ram Dhani Sao and Basanti Devi (Appellant herein) i.e. the mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased for the offence under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code road with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years each.2. During pendency of this appeal, the Appellant No.1 Ram Dhani Sao died and as such the appeal against him has abated. The remaining appellant Basanti D...
Bhagirath Rawani and Malti Devi Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-17-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)BLJR341; [2007(1)JCR381(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.7.2002 and 17.7.2002 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 202/99, whereby and where under the learned Sessions Judge held the appellants guilty under Sections 304B IPC and convinced and sentenced them to undergo RI for ten years. 2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that the appellant Bhagirath Rawani was married with deceased Bina Devi in May 1998 according to Hindu rites. It is further stated that just after the marriage the appellants, husband and mother-in-law of the deceased, used to torture her for one bed and Yamaha motorcycle as dowry. The deceased used to inform her parents regarding this. The informant Digambar Rawani placed an order for preparation of bed and assured to give motorcycle as and when money is arranged. However, on 30.11.98 at 6.45 AM Binod Rawani informed them that Bina was seriously ill. The informant along with ...
Arun Sharma, Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-17-2006
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR434(Jhr)]
Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. All the appellants were charged for having committed offences of wrongfully restraining insulting and causing injuries to the informant Shahdeo Sharma and his sons in furtherance of common intention. They were tried and on conclusion, are convicted and sentenced under Section 323 IPC to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment, two years rigorous imprisonment under Section 504 IPC, one month rigorous imprisonment under Section 341 IPC, three years rigorous imprisonment under Section 324 IPC, five years rigorous imprisonment under Section 325/34 IPC and to pay fine of Rs. 5000/- each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one year.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 7.9.2000, while the informant's son Moti Sharma had gone to take bath in the river Ajay, he was assaulted by appellant No. 2 with fists and slaps when the informant went to the house of the appellant No. 2 to enquire about the same, he and his sons were assaulted by the appellant...
Yogeshwar Hembram and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-17-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ1050; [2006(4)JCR646(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. Both the appellants stands convicted under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for five years vide judgment and order dated 10.4.2002 passed in Sessions Trial No. 44 of 1992 by Additional Sessions Judge, IXth, Dhanbad.2. Brief facts leading to their conviction are that in the night of 25.11.1990 when the informant Sudhir Mandal was sleeping in Mart shop situated at Pindrahat Mari, along with PW 1 Kalo Bauri and PW 11 Sapan Mandal, some dacoits entered inside the shop and started demanding money. He could identify one Sufal Manjhi and the appellant Yogeshwar Hembram, resident of village Kanadth amongst the dacoits. According to them, these two persons used to come to his shop for Mari. He further asserted that he was physically assaulted while Sufal Manjhi was threatening him with pistol and carry away one old Hercules cycle, hundred rupees in cash and some old clothes including his red cornered dhoti. It was further alleged...
Santosh Kumar Biswas and Aslam Ansari Vs. State of Bihar Now Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-14-2006
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR10(Jhr)]
R.R. Prasad, J.1. Since both the appeals arise out of common judgment it were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. The appellants, Santosh Kumar Biswas, and Aslam Ansari were put on trial along with Tohid Khan to face trial under Section 366 and 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that the appellants Santosh Kumar Biswas and Aslam Ansari along with co-convict Tohid Khan kidnapped Sunita Kumar (P.W.1) Kabita Kumari (P.W.3) and Meena Kumari (P.W.4) respectively and committed rape upon them respectively and the trial court having found them guilty under Section 376(1) of the Indian Penal Code sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and further on finding them guilty to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code with the stipulation that both the sentences shall run concurrently.3. The facts of the case are that the informant Dwarika Rawani (P.W.2) informed the police regarding mi...
The Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and or ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-14-2006
Reported in: [2006(4)JCR37(Jhr)]
ORDERS.J. Mukhopadhaya, A.C.J.1. This writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner-Tata Iron & Steel Company Ltd. (hereinafter to be referred as 'TISCO') for the following relief:(i) To set aside the order, issued by the Commissioner, Commercial Taxes -cum- Secretary, Jharkhand, communicated vide letter No. -Sales Tax/02/2001-1970/Ranchi dated 30th July, 2004, whereby and whereunder, it has been directed to collect entry tax on 'imported coal', pursuant to Notification No. S.O.88 dated 23rdMarch, 2002;(ii) To set aside part of Notification No. S.O.88 dated 23rdMarch, 2002, issued by the State of Jharkhand, whereby, 2% entry tax has been sought for to be levied on 'imported coal';(iii) To set aside the notice dated 27th August, 2004, issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Jamshedpur Urban Circle, Jamshedpur, whereby and whereunder, the petitioner has been asked as to why penalty be not imposed on it since pursuant to Notification No. S.O.88 dated 23rdMarch, 2002 it h...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »