Jharkhand Court February 2007 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.
Kamal Kishore Prasad Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-07-2007
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR230(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. Sole appellant Kamal Kishore Prasad stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. 1947 and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of the said fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months respectively , by the 7th Additional Judicial Commissioner-cum-Special Judge (Vigilance), Ranchi in Sessions Code No. 2 of 1984.2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that the appellant was employed as Accountant in Bihar State Electricity Board. Ranchi on 27.11.1984. During this period, one Md. Shamim Ahmad had performed some work as contractor in connection with rural electrification. As the work allotted to this contractor could not be completed in stipulated period it resulted in withholding of his payments. As per prosecution case, Md. Shamim Ahmad applied for extension of time and t...
Shashi Bhushan Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-07-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR66(Jhr)]
ORDERD.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Petitioner Shashi Bhushan Singh has prayed for invoking inherent powers of this Court for quashing the order dated 17.7.2006 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh in G-(Complaint) Case No. 78 of 2006 whereby the learned Court below has taken cognizance of the offence under Section 174, CrPC.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order passed by the learned Court below is totally devoid of substance, since Section 174, Cr PC does not constitute any offence either cognizable or non-cognizable and yet, the petitioner has been sought to be prosecuted for the offence which is not existing in law.3. Brief fact of the case is that in Sessions Trial No. 440 of 1993 pending in the Court of Shri Ramendra Nath Rai, Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 5, Hazaribagh, the petitioner was summoned to appear in the Court for recording his deposition, but despite summons, petitioner had failed to appear. The learned trial Cou...
Bechan Manjhi, Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-06-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)BLJR811; 2007CriLJ2454; [2007(4)JCR397(Jhr)]
R.R. Prasad, J. 1. All the four appellants, namely, Bechan Manjhi, Brinda Mandal, Bhero Rana and Anil Manjhi were put on trial to face charges under Sections 302, 376(2)(g)/511 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegations that they first made attempt to commit rape upon Pratima Kumari the deceased and then committed murder of her in furtherance of their common intention. However, the trial court found the appellants guilty under Sections 376(2)(g)/511 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 304 part I read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years on each count and the sentences were ordered to be run concurrently.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 11.3.1999 at about 2 P.M. Sukhi Devi, the informant (P.W.3) was having meal along with her daughters, namely, Jermani Devi, Rabina Devi and Pratima Kumari, aged about 13 years. Pratima Kumari finished her meal first and then went away....
Radha Sah @ Radha Saha, Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-06-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR922; 2007CriLJ2805; [2007(4)JCR615(Jhr)]
R.R. Prasad, J.1. This revision application filed under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment dated 16.8.2001 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Pakur in Cr. App. No. 13/16 of 1994 whereby learned Additional Judge affirmed the judgment passed by Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pakur in G.R. Case No. 557 of 1990/T.R. No. 704 of 1994 whereby he convicted the petitioner No. 1 Radha Sah @ Radha Saha under Sections 354 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code whereas petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 were convicted under Section 225 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 23.10.1990 at about 11 A.M. Sabita Devi, the informant (P.W.6) had gone to a w...
Binod Kumar Sharma Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-06-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1141; [2007(3)JCR473(Jhr)]
Dilip Kumar Sinha, J.1. The appellant Binod Kumar Sharma has preferred this appeal, which is directed against the judgment of his conviction under Sections 306 & 498A I.P.C. and order of sentence dated 24.4.1999 passed by 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Jamshedpur against him whereby and whereunder the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and two years respectively in Sessions Trial No. 444/1990.2. The prosecution case before the trial court below was that the statement of Meera Sharma (since deceased) wife of the appellant was recorded at Tata Main Hospital on 25.5.88 at 12.15 hours by P.W. 8 Brij Bihari Ram A.S.I, of Police. Meera Sharma narrated that her husband appellant and mother-in-law Gulabi Devi had been very frequently chastisby her and that she was abetted by her husband-appellant to commit suicide by setting her body on fire. On 25.5.88 at about 10 A.M. some domestic quarrel picked up and in the same transaction she was abetted by the appellant...
Brahmanand Tiwari Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-06-2007
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR5(Jhr)]; (2007)2LLJ935Jhar
1. The petitioner-appellant was an employee under the Respondents. He was dismissed from service after enquiry on the basis of charge of absence from duly and for assaulting his immediate superior Officer. Reference has been made in the year 1991 on the demand notice dated 14.09.1987. The Tribunal considered the question of the dispute being stale and rejected the claim of the petitioner-appellant stating that there is ten years' unexplained delay.2. This verdict was challenged before the learned Single Judge in the writ petition. While confirming the verdict of the Tribunal, the learned Single Judge held that there is long unexplained delay. This is the subject matter of this L.P.A.3. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner-appellant heavily relied on a decision of the Supreme Court [ : (1999)ILLJ1260SC Ajaib Singh v. Sirhind Cooperative Marketing-cum-Processing Service Society Ltd. and Anr.,]. He submits that mere delay would not suffice lo reject the claim for reinstatement. It...
Mahabir Prasad Sahu Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-06-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1289; [2007(2)JCR279(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 2.6.1999 passed by Shri Anant Vijay Singh, 3rd Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in S.T. No. 154 of 1991 whereby and whereunder the sole appellant, Mahabir Prasad Sahu was convicted under Section 304 Part-1 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous Imprisonment for seven years. No separate sentence was awarded to the appellant for his conviction under Section 323 IPC. Other three co-accused were acquitted by the same Judgment.2. The prosecution story in short is that the informant, Chedi Prasad Sahu (P.W.1) presented a written report (Ext.1) before the Mandar Police on 1.1.1990 stating inter alia that on 30.12.1989, at about 8 p.m. four accused persons including the appellant, Mahabir Prasad Sahu appeared in the lane, opposite the house of the informant. The appellant was having spade (Kudal in hands) whereas his other brothers namely, Bhagwat Sahu, Sahabir Sahu and Sulendra...
Rashmi Verma and ors. Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-05-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ4671
D.K. Sinha, J.1. Heard Mr. K.P. Deo, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Shri N.N. Singh, learned Counsel for the O.P. No. 2 and Shri R. Mukhopadhayay, A.P.P. for the State.2. The petitioners have preferred this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashment of the entire criminal proceeding including the order impugned dated 21.2.06 passed by S.D.J.M., Ranchi taking the cognizance of the offence against them under Section 498A I.P.C. in Complaint Case No. 821/05.3. The prosecution story in Complaint Case No. 821/05 in short is that the Opposite Party No. 2 complainant was married to the petitioner No. 4 Rupesh Kumar on 22.11.2000 at Patna and on the eve of marriage Rs. 1.5 lakh in cash with T.V., Fridge & Washing machine etc. were given. After the marriage the complainant went to her matrimonial home at Darbhanga and from there she was taken to Banglore by her husband to his place of posting. The petitioner No. 1 Rashmi Verma is her Nanad, the petitioner No. 2 Ritesh Kumar is the y...
Dr. Maheshwar Tiwari and ors. Vs. Vinoba Bhawe University, Through Its ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-05-2007
Reported in: [2007(2)JCR8(Jhr)]
ORDERR.K. Merathia, J.1. In view of the statements made in paragraphs 8 and 9 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 4 and 5 on 3.1.2007, Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, appearing for the petitioners, submitted that this writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to Departmental Pay Fixation Committee to take a decision regarding pay fixation in UGC Pay-Scale and accordingly the payment of the arrears from 1.1.1996 to 28.2.2000 should be made to the petitioners by the Central Government and State Government as per the proportion between them. He further submitted that if the Departmental Committee decides to fix pay-scale of the petitioners in UGC pay-scale, the same should be paid from April, 2000 onwards also.2. Mr. Mehta, appearing for the University, submitted that the University is only a disbursing authority and as and when funds are received from the State/Central Government, payments will be made.3. In view of the stand taken by respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in paragrap...
Thomas Kerketta Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Feb-05-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR72a(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for a direction on the respondents to take a decision on the petitioner's representation for his voluntary retirement or to accept the offer of his voluntary retirement. It has been stated (hat the petitioner is an Assistant Teacher in Primary School, Muria of District-Simdega and he had applied for taking voluntary retirement. It has been stated that the petitioner has completed more than 20 years of his qualifying service and is eligible to apply for voluntary retirement. Under some personal circumstances, the petitioner decided to take voluntary retirement and for that purpose he filed a representation before the District Superintendent of Education, Gumla on 19.9.1998, but no order was passed by the said authority. The petitioner made repeated requested and also filed several representations, but till date no order has been passed on his representation. It has been stated that as per the provisions o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »