Jharkhand Court April 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.
Rakesh Kumar and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-24-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR61(Jhr)]
ORDERD.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Petitioners have prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding initiated against them vide Complaint Case No. 355 of 1998 as also the order dated 7.4.1999 passed by Shri P.N. Rai, Judicial Magistrate, Daltonganj in the aforesaid case, whereby cognizance for the offence under Sections 3 and 4 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for the alleged violation of Clauses viii, ix and x of Section 3 of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was taken by the Court below.2. Prayer for quashing has been made on the basis of two main grounds; the first ground is that the order of cognizance and continuation of the criminal proceeding, is bad in law and is an abuse of the process of the Court on account of the fact that even on the basis of the entire allegations in the complaint, no offence either for the offence under Section 3 or Section 4 of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is made out against the pe...
Suraj Oraon Vs. the State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-23-2007
Reported in: [2007(3)JCR324(Jhr)]
1. Sole appellant Suraj Oraon stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for life, by the 3rdAdditional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 707 of 1993.2. Brief facts lending to this appeal are that deceased Cherga Oraon has gone with the appellant in the morning of 6.3.1993 and he did not return till night. As further stated, P.W.I Budha Oraon, the informant and uncle of the deceased, came to know at 7.30 P.M. that the deceased has been injured by someone. He goes to the place of occurrence and found the deceased lying badly injured, blood oozing out from his body and one female, wife of Ganshu Pian, trying to put water in his mouth. He further asserted that when he went near the diceased, he disclosed that the appellant has given dagger blow on his chest and he will die and by this time, P.W.3, wife of the deceased as well as other villagers assembled there. They were also informe...
State of Bihar Vs. Chinibas Mahto and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-23-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR2724
M.Y. Eqbal and D.K. Sinha, JJ.1. Members of the Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes and other communities whose agricultural lands were acquired 45-50 years back and Steel Plant was established by the Central Government, namely, Bokaro Steel Plant of the Steel Authority of India Limited are the sufferers. The unfortunate part of this case is that those raiyats and land loosers have still not been paid their rightful and legitimate compensation because of the fact that the State of Bihar, now Jharkhand challenged the award passed by the Land Acquisition Judge by filing these appeals which are pending for the last 16 years in this Court.2. On 1.5.2006, these appeals were taken up by learned Single Judge and the same was referred to the Division Bench. While referring the matter to the Division Bench, learned Single Judge, considering the provisions of Section 89 of the C.P.C. and the Mandate of the Supreme Court, expressed his feelings that it is high time the dispute be settled through Al...
Jitu Munda Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-23-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ3097
1. Sole appellant Jitu Munda stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve rigorous imprisonment for life, by the Additional Judicial Commissioner, Khunti in Sessions Trial No. 691 of 1993.2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that deceased Guruwari Devi was married with the appellant for last two years. How ever, there was quarrel between them and deceased used to take shelter in her parent's house situated In Mauza - Aradih, Police Station - Bundu frequently. According to P.W. 1, Sonabans Mahli, on 25-9-1992 she along with P.W. 3 and P.W. 6 was breeding grass from the paddy fields when the appellant came there armed with a tangi and assaulted the deceased, resulting in her death on the spot. The females could not resist. Villagers working in nearby fields assembled. In the meantime, the appellant managed to flee.3. The mailer was reported to Bundu Police Station next, clay, on which Bundu Police Station Case No, 76 o...
Gama Nisha and Munna Ansari Vs. Chottu Mian
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR2026
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. This revision application arises against the order of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad on 17/07/1998, in Cr. Misc. No. 4 of 1997, whereby the Principal Judge, Family Court, allowed the application filed by the Opposite Party Chottu Mian, i.e. the husband of petitioner No. 1 and father of petitioner No. 2 Munna Ansari under Section 127 Cr. P.C.2. The facts in short are that the petitioner, who is the wife of the opposite party Chottu Mian (herein after referred to as the wife for the sake of convenience), filed an application before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad, under Section 125 Cr.P.C. against her husband Chottu Mian for grant of maintenance for herself and for her minor son Munna Ansari, which was registered as M.P. Case No. 1/1995. The Principal Judge, Family Court by his order dated 18/05/1995 allowed the said application of the wife and directed the husband to pay maintenance @ Rs. 400/- P.M. for the wife and @ Rs. 300/- P.M. for the ...
Kanti Thakur Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)BLJR1872
Permod Kohli, J.1. Aggrieved of their termination vide order No. 91(8) dated 14th May, 2003 and consequential Memo No. 99 dated 25th June, 2003, petitioners have filed these writ petitions, challenging the same and have also prayed for various consequential reliefs, including salary for the period indicated in the writ petitions.2. The grounds of termination, indicated in the impugned order dated 14th May, 2003, are:(a) No advertisement for appointment was published;(b) Names were not obtained from local Employment Exchange on the basis of qualifications fixed in the advertisement;(c) Selection Committee was not constituted by competent authority;(d) No roster clearance was done by the competent authority;(e) No reservation Policy was followed after point wise roster clearance; &(f) The circular issued for appointment was not followed.3. While disputing all the grounds, it is urged on behalf of the petitioners that their appointments were made in accordance with law and the grounds sho...
Sashi Kumar Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Through the Chief Postmast ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR217(Jhr)]
Permod Kohli, J.1. This writ application is directed against the order dated 25.8.2006, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal Circuit Bench at Ranchi, whereby O.A. filed by respondent No. 4 has been allowed.2. Vide impugned order, appointment of the present petitioner has been quashed and a direction issued to consider the case of respondent No. 4 for appointment in his place.3. Briefly staled facts are that vide notification, dated 13.3.2000, the names of eligible candidates were invited through the employment exchange for the post of EDBPM. Petitioner herein and respondent No. 4 applied for the post of EDBPM, Bagra EDBO. As many as 11 applications were received. The criteria for selection was marks obtained in Matriculation Examination and possession of landed property. It is admitted case of the parties that respondent No. 4 secured 602 out 900 marks in Matriculation Examination whereas the present petitioner had less marks (3rd Division). On completion of selection, petitio...
Nand Kishore Jaiswal and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: II(2007)DMC640; [2007(3)JCR224(Jhr)]
ORDERD.P. Singh, J.1. Heard both the sides at length.2. The present petition has been preferred by the petitioners, in laws of the complainant-informant Suchita Jaiswal admittedly married with Nand Kishore Jaiswal in June 2001. The dispute between the parties arose on question of some demands made by the petitioners, side. According to leaned counsel for the petitioners all the allegations were false because Suchita did not like to live with them for which a matrimonial case was filed in Madhepura on 16.4.2004, thereafter present complaint was filed on 17.6.2004 in Dhanbad. Therefore the present complaint petition referred to police for investigation by the learned CJM, Dhanbad should be quashed. It is also submitted that this Court has stayed the further proceeding before the Court of CJM arising of this FIR by order dated 20.5.2005.3. According to learned Counsels efforts were made for reconciliation by different Benches and the matter was referred to Conciliator appointed by the Jha...
Sonal Diwan Vs. Miss Neeta Diwan and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR212(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner who is one of the defendants has challenged the order dated 7.3.2006 and 9.5.2006 passed by the sub-Judge, IInd, Koderma in Title Suit No. 17/01, whereby he has rejected the application filed by the petitioner for transposing her as plaintiff at the stage when plaintiff files petitioner for withdrawal of the suit.2. The facts of case lie in a narrow compass:Plaintiff/respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed partition Title Suit No. 17 of 2001 seeking preliminary decree for partition of 1/6th share each in the suit property fully described in the schedule of the plaint and also for appointment of survey knowing Pleader Commissioner for survey out of their share and preparation of final decree. In the said suit, petitioner was not impleaded as defendant although, she is sister of the plaintiff and have share in the suit property. When petitioner came to know about the suit, she appeared and filed...
Neelawati Transport Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: [2007(4)JCR40(Jhr)]
1. This cross-objection purported to be under Order XLI, Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, has been filed by the respondent-owner in the instant M.A. No. 224 of 2002.2. Miscellaneous Appeal No. 224 of 2002 has been filed by the claimant for enhancement of compensation.3. It appears from the judgment passed by the Tribunal that the deceased was a 'khalasi' in a Trecker. While the Trecker was going from one place to another place, it was dashed by a truck. The claim case was filed against the owner and insurer of the truck, who are respondents. The Tribunal held that it was because of the gross negligence of the driver of the truck accident took place. The Tribunal further held that at the relevant time when the accident took place the driver of the truck was holding a licence to drive light motor vehicles. On these findings the Tribunal awarded compensation and fixed responsibility upon the owner of the truck, due to the reason that it was violation of the provisions of the Motor ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »