Jharkhand Court December 2008 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.
Nikhat Jahan Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-04-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR573(Jhr)]
ORDERJaya Roy, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the State.2. The petitioner has filed the instant revision application for setting aside the order dated 8.1.2007 whereby the Court below has refused to discharge the petitioner (Nikhat Jhahan) from Barihatu P.S. Case No. 161 of 2005/S.T. No. 547 of 2006 registered for the offence under Sections 341/323/324/498-A/307 and 108 of Indian Penal Code against her.3. This case was instituted on the basis of a written report of the informant Rafat Jahan, wife of Muslim Ahmad Choudhary stating therein that her husband Muslim Ahamd Choudhary after the marriage, started demanding Rs. 5,00,000/- (five lakhs) and subjecting the informant to mental cruelty on which her brother Sahnawaj tried to reconcile the matter but could not. The further allegation is that on 15.11.2005 in the evening, the husband of the informant entered into the house and started assaulting the informant by leg and fist due to which her teeth ...
Dulal Chandra Basu Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-04-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR542(Jhr)]
ORDERN.N. Tiwari, J.1. In this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding of C.P. Case No. 570 of 2003, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad and has also prayed for quashing the order taking cognizance dated 4th August, 2003 by which the cognizance of the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioner and has also prayed for quashing the order dated 22nd December, 2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XIII, Dhanbad in Cr. Revision No. 249 of 2003, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge-XIII has dismissed the revision application.2. According to the petitioner, the case is of civil nature and there was dispute of title and as such, no case under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code is made out.3. From the complaint petition (Annexure-1), it is evident that the petitioner had entered into an agreement of sale of land acquired by his father by virtue of r...
Vijay Kumar Sinha Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-03-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR1(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal , J.1. In this application the petitioner has prayed fore quashing the order dated 22.7.2008 passed on O.A. No. 55/2008, whereby the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench dismissed the application filed by the petitioner and affirmed the order of suspension passed by the respondent authority.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass.The petitioner is a member of Indian Forest Services and placed under Jharkhand. When he was serving as Deputy Director (Marketing), Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation. Ranchi, two FIRs were registered against him i.e. Crime Nos. 50/98 and 66/98 of Latehar Police Station. The allegations were that he committed serious irregularities of fraudulent procurement and involved in conspiracy, misappropriation of funds and financial irregularities. Chargesheets were also filed against the petitioner in both the above cases, which are pending for disposal.3. While the criminal case was instituted against the petitioner, he was ar...
Ashok Kumar Vishwakarma Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-03-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR9(1)(Jhr)]
ORDERD.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Petitioner, in this writ application has prayed for a direction commanding upon the Respondents particularly the Respondent No. 2 to dispose of the S.A.R. Appeal No. 47 R-15/2007-08, preferred by the petitioner within a specified time and also for restraining the respondents from dispossessing the petitioner from the lands in question during the pendency of the appeal.2. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent-State.3. It appears from the statements of the petitioner that earlier a proceeding for restoration of the disputed lands under the provisions of Section 71 of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act filed by the father of the Respondent No. 4 and the matter was heard and disposed of by the concerned authorities and against the order of disposal by way of rejection of the application, the Respondent No. 4 did not prefer any appeal. Rather, it was the villagers who chose to file and prefer an appeal before the Deputy C...
Shyamdhan Mahto Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-03-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR8(Jhr)]
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs;2. For issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing of an order dated 22.2.2003 as contained in Memo No. 181, issued under the signature of Chief Conservator of Forest-cum-Chief Coordinator, World Food Programme, Jharkhand, Ranchi, whereby and whereunder the First Time Bound Promotion given to the petitioner far back in the year 1993 with effect from 17.7.1992 in the time scale of Rs. 1320-2040/- has been cancelled after about three years of petitioner's retirement.3. For quashing of that part of the order dated 12.7.2003 as contained in Memo No. 263 of the Divisional Forest Officer, World Food Programme Division, Chaibasa (Tasar), by which, the A.G. has been informed that Rs. 69,872/- is recoverable from the petitioner's retiral benefits to that effect necessary entry has been made in the service book and pension paper in utter violation of pri...
Dhrupdeo Tiwari and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-02-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR6(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 25.11.2006 passed by the Additional District Judge. Fast Track Court-1, Bokaro in S.T. No. 209 of 1999, whereby the prayer for releasing the forfeited bail amount has been rejected.3. The relevant facts in short, are that these two petitioners stood as bailers of the accused Navin Kumar Tiwari and Mithilesh Kumar in connection with Sessions Trial No. 209/1999. On 18.3.2006, the bail bonds of the accused persons were cancelled and warrant of arrest as well as process under Section 82-83 Cr PC was issued. Thereafter, on 19.4.2006 the bail amount of the sureties were ordered to be forfeited and an order for issuance of distress warrant was also passed. It further appears that both the aforesaid accused persons surrendered in the Court on 7.7.2006 and 28.7.2006 respectively.4. The petitioners are challenging the order issuing forfeiture of bail amounts in this writ application.5. It is submitte...
Bihar State Financial Corporation Vs. Raj Hans Steel Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-02-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Jhar136
1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant-Bihar State Financial Corporation Ltd. (B.S.F.C in short) against the order dated 11.1.2008 passed by the learned Company Judge in Company Petition No. 5/1999R, by which the learned Company Judge allowed the respondent-company, M/s. Raj Hans Steel Ltd., to avail the benefit of OTS scheme of 2006 and for this purpose, liberty was granted to the respondent-company to avail the chance to apply as per the OTS scheme of 2006.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the B.S.F.C submitted that he had apprised the learned Company Judge that the respondent-company cannot be permitted to avail the benefit of the OTS scheme of 2006, as the said scheme has already expired way back on 5th February, 2007. Besides this, it was also pointed out that the eligibility to avail the benefit of the OTS scheme of 2006 was that the entrepreneur should have deposited 50% of the outstanding principal amount plus 10% of the amount towards interest, which it had failed t...
Mrs. Santoshila D. Hembrom Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-01-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR4(Jhr)]
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.I.A. No. 1382 of 20081. I.A. No. 1382 of 2008 has been filed for substitution of the only legal heir and successor of the writ petitioner, who died during pendency of the writ petition on 31.3.2008, leaving behind the deponent as the sole legal heir and successor.2. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties, the sole legal heir and successor of deceased Mrs. Santoshila (the writ petitioner), namely, Joy Raj Eric Tudu, is substituted in his place. Let the name of deceased writ petitioner Mrs. Santoshila be deleted from the cause title.3. I.A. No. 1382 of 2008 stands disposed of.4. Let the correct memo of the party be filed.W.P. (S) No. 2543 of 20035. This writ petition has been preferred for Issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction, commanding upon the respondents to pay the retiral dues including the arrears of salary of the deceased writ petitioner since November, 1995 to January, 1998 when the deceased writ petitioner had been superannuated from...
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-01-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR363(Jhr)]
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 19.9.2006 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, in O.A. No. 34/2006 whereby the tribunal remitted back the matter to the appellate authority for reconsideration.2. The petitioner Kendriya Vidyalya Santaghan is a registered Society fully financed by the Government of India to meet the educational needs of the children of transferable Central Government employees including defence personnel and to run the school. One of such school is running at Chakradharpur. On 1.2.2003 one complaint was made by Sri Rajesh Sarangi, local guardian of Kumari Varsha Tripathi, a student of class VIII in the said school at Chakradharpur, to the Principal about the misbehaviour with his ward by the respondent Muni Lal Prasad and demanded action against him. In the complaint i...
Basudeo Ahir @ Basudeo Kumar Mahto and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-01-2008
Reported in: [2009(1)JCR3(Jhr)]
ORDERD.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Petitioners in this writ application have prayed for quashing the notice dated 9.9.2008 (Annexure-6) issued by the respondent No. 4 whereby the petitioners have been informed that they would be dispossessed from the premises under their occupation on 15.9.2008. Such order of dispossession has been passed in pursuance to the order passed by the respondent No. 5 in SAR Case No. 22/05-06.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the order in the S.A.R. Proceeding was in itself bad in law in as much as the same which is purported to have passed in exercise of power under Section 71-A of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act, is totally illegal and without jurisdiction. It is further submitted that on the submissions made by the petitioners, this Court had passed an order of interim protection on 15.9.2008 while issuing notice to the Respondent No. 6.3. Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 6 as also learned Counsel for the Respondent State would submit at the ou...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›