Jharkhand Court December 2008 Judgments
Shyam Lal Sahu, Vs. the State of Jharkhand and Ajay Prasad, Officer-in ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-23-2008
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR945
D.K. Sinha, J.1. In the instant writ petition, the petitioners have requested for setting aside/quashment of the entire criminal proceeding including the cognizance order impugned dated 23.10.2007 taken against them in Palkot P.S. Case No. 14 of 2007 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 167 of 2007 for the alleged offence under Sections 379/411/34 I.P.C. as also under Section 54 of the Jharkhand Mines and Minerals Act and Sections 41/42 of the Indian Forest Act pending before the S.D.J.M., Gumla.2. The prosecution story as it stands narrated in the self statement of Sub-Inspector of Police Ajay Prasad (Officer-in-Charge of Palkot Police Station) was that on 16.02.2007 while he was on day patrolling duty with the police party, he received secret information and pursuant to that he arrived on the Bisahi Rock situated towards East of the N.H. 23. When he climbed over the hillock, the labourers engaged in breaking the stones and loading the stone chips on the vehicle started fleeing at the sight...
Tag this Judgment!Mangra Uraon, Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-23-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ1908
Jaya Roy, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 25.8.1990 passed by 2nd Additional Session Judge, Singhbhum, at Chuibasa in S.T No. 95 of 1989 whereby the appellants have been convicted under Section 302/34 l.P.C. and have been sentenced to undergo Rl tor life and they have been further convicted under Section 323/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo RI for one year each. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The prosecution has failed to prove the charge under Section 307/34 I.P.C. against these appellants.2. The prosecution story in brief is that Sanha No 129 dated 9.08.1988 was lodged by the Bimal Lakra alias Binay Lakra stating therein that on 8.8.1988 at 9.30 P.M. while the informant along with his brother Mohan Lakra (deceased) and Boyas Kachhap were returning from Monoharpur after cinema show, these three appellants namely Mangra Uraon, Etwa Uraon, and Sohichar Uraon stopped them on the road near Pani Tanki at village Donga Kata and after exchange...
Tag this Judgment!Bhuwang Oraon and Bablu Oraon Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR299(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this appeal, a very interesting question, which needs consideration by this Court, is as to whether the Deputy Commissioner or any of the officer exercising power conferred by Section 71-A of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 can issue interim order of injunction.2. The facts of the instant case lie in a narrow compass: The appellants, who are members of Scheduled Tribes, filed an application under Section 71-A of the C.N.T. Act (in short 'the Act') for restoration of land on the allegation that they were fraudulently dispossessed by the private respondents. The said application was registered as S.L.R. Case No. 120/06-07. The Special Officer, Scheduled Area Regulation, issued show cause notices to the private respondents. In the meantime, the Special Officer directed the respondents to stop construction work on the land in question. The respondents challenged the said order by filing a writ petition being W.P. (C) No. 5434 of 2007, whereby the respondents were dir...
Tag this Judgment!indrajeet Sanyal, Vs. State of Jharkhand and Awadhesh Kumar Singh
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2008
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR1116
Amareshwar Sahay, J.Heard the parties.1. The points involved in both the writ petitioners are the same and as such both cases were taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. The facts in short of W.P.(Cr.) No. 142 of 2007 are that on 22.01.2006, an F.I.R. was lodged by one Anand Mohan Singh, Assistant Sub Inspector of Police of Nimdih Police Station, alleging therein that while he was returning after making investigation in a case along with other Police officials he found a Truck bearing No. BR-13/9089 loaded with white stone going on Patherdih Road. He got the Truck stopped but the driver fled away after stopping the said Truck. The labourers on the Truck disclosed that the white stones were loaded from Jhimri forest and that they had no proper documents for the same. The stone loaded in the Truck was seized and the F.I.R. was lodged under Sections 379, 411/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4/21 of the Mines and Mineral (Development and Regulation) Act,...
Tag this Judgment!Rohan Rawani Vs. Mohi Rawani and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ3087
Jaya Roy, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for setting aside the judgment dated 12.11.1992 passed by the Additional Sessions judge, Deoghar in Cr. Appeal Nos. 25 and 26 of 1987 whereby judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed against the accused-respondents by the trial court, has been sol aside.2. Respondents, Marwari Rawani, Narain Rawani and Bengali Ramani were convicted by the trial court and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two months under Section 147 IPC, three months under Section 427 IPC, six months under Section 379 IPC. Respondents Mohi Rawani, Choudhary Rawani and Suresh Rawani were convicted under Section 379 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for six months, three months under Section 148 IPC, three months under Section 427 IPC, by the judgment dated 26.3.87 passed in PCR case No. 262/1981 (T.R. No. 748/87 by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st class Deoghar.3. Against the aforesaid judgment of convict...
Tag this Judgment!Deolal Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2008
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR943
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. The petitioner in this case was appointed as a Senior Instructor in the I.T.I., Hazaribagh. He had joined the service under the State of Bihar on 15.06.1967. He was given first time bound promotion after completing more than 10 years in service on 01.04.1981, on the pay scale of Rs. 850-1360/-. The petitioner was also granted second time bound promotion with corresponding increase in the pay scale.The petitioner was superannuated on 31.10.2001 whereafter the provisional pension and gratuity, on being sanctioned by the concerned authorities of the respondents, was paid to him along with the amount of Group Insurance and amount of G.P.F. Such payments were made to him by the end of December, 2001. On 04.09.2002, petitioner's pay was re-fixed pursuant to the revision of pay scales by the respondent No. 3. Later in December, 2002, the petitioner was paid the Leave Encashment amount also. However, by order dated 15.07.2003 (Annexure-1) issued by the respondent No. 2, th...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Bindeshwari Mishra Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2008
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR959
Ajit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding upon the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for fixation of family pension on the pay, which her deceased husband was entitled to on the date of his death and for fixation of pay scale of Captain Ravindra Nath Mishra on the date of his death and for further granting family pension, as permissible to the petitioner instead of Rs. 940/- per month and for further direction to the respondents to pay the said family pension in accounts existed in S.B.I., Hanuman Nagar, Patna and also for arrears of family pension with 18% interest per annum thereon with increment and compensation.2. The short point in issue is with regard to interpretation of Liberalized Pensionary Awards in the case of death/disability, which was issued by the Government of India's Notification O.N., No. 33/5/89-P. & P.W. (K) dated the 9th April, 1990.3. The respondents in thei...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Dhela Rani and anr. Vs. Sri Deepak Prasad and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-18-2008
Reported in: 2010ACJ235; [2009(1)JCR326(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 12.1.2004 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Giridih in Claim Accident Case No. 47/99, whereby he has dismissed the claim application filed by the claimants-appellants.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. The deceased Sunil Kumar Saw was waiting near his vehicle No. BR 23P-0672 at the Giridih bus stand for passengers. In the meantime the driver of another offending vehicle No. BR 17P- 0687, namely Raju Thathera, quarreled with the deceased on the issue of taking passengers in the vehicle and thereafter the driver Raju Thathera of vehicle No. BR 17P-0687 turned his vehicle and dashed the same rashly negligently, as a result of which the deceased was crushed under the wheal of the vehicle and died. The claimants, who are the legal representatives of the deceased Sunil Kumar Saw, filed the claim application claiming compensation. The respondent-Insurance Company contested the case by filing w...
Tag this Judgment!Subhadra Devi Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-18-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar87; [2009(1)JCR571(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties. This application is being disposed of finally at this stage itself.2. The case of the writ petitioner is that her late husband namely Late Shashi Bhushan Singh had taken two L.I.C. Policies which were under Double Accident Benefits (D.A.B.) Scheme being Policy Nos. 60342661 dated 25.07.1980 for Rs. 20,000/- and 60383837 dated 28.07.1983 for a sum of Rs. 25,000/-. Under the Scheme of those Policies, in case of death of the Policy holder in an accident, the L.I.C. would pay the double the amount of sum insured to the dependants of the deceased. In other words, if the Policy is of Rs. 20,000/- then the dependent would get Rs. 40,000/-.3. It is not in dispute that the husband of the petitioner died in a motor vehicle accident on 16.08.1986. After the death of her husband, the petitioner submitted the aforesaid two Policies to the respondent Corporation for payment of the amount under the said two Policies. It is stated that the respondent No. 3, by...
Tag this Judgment!Anil Kumar Tirkey Vs. Neelam Kumari Kachhap (Tirkey)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-18-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar33
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal by the husband under Section 19 of the Family Court Act is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.4.2004 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur in Matrimonial Suit No. 14 of 2000 whereby the aforesaid suit filed by the appellant under Sections 22 and 23 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 has been dismissed.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:Both the appellant and the respondent are by faith Christians and were married in October. 1995 at Ranchi. After marriage, the respondent started living with the appellant at his residence in Jamshedpur. Out of the wedlock, a daughter was born. The appellant's case was that the respondent lived with the appellant at Jamshedpur till November 1997 and thereafter, she deserted the appellant. It was contended that despite repeated requests and reminders, the respondent did not turn up and started living with the appellant. On the other hand, the respondent's case was that before the marr...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »