Jharkhand Court May 2008 Judgments
Mahendra Kumar Agarwalla Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-30-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR359(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Giridih (M) P.S. Case No. 132 of 2005 for the alleged offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 120-B, IPC as also under Section 27 of the Arms Act.2. The prosecution story in short was that on 28.5.2005 at about 6 p.m. while the informant Assistant Manager, Brahmdiha Open Cast Coalmines Project was working in his project office, the accused Atul Kumar Agrawal, Ashok Kumar Choudhary with other 6-8 miscreants arrived there variously armed with rifles and guns on Qualis as well as Maruti Van. The accused Atul Kumar Agrawal and Ashok Kumar Choudhary commanded the other accused persons to eliminate the informant as he was an important person in the project. Pursuant to such command the miscreants resorted indiscriminate firing but the informant escaped from the place of occurrence and saved his life. The employees intervened and they started brick batting with the aid of the security guards in the project. In the mean time t...
Tag this Judgment!Shib Prasad Mahato and anr. and Rabindra Mahto Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-16-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ3347; [2008(3)JCR237(Jhr)]
D.P. Singh, J.1. Both the appeals arising out of the same impugned judgment, have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. All the three appellants in both the appeals stand convicted under Sections 302/34 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and they have been sentenced for life under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for seven years and also to pay fine of Rs. 5000/- each under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code. In default of payment of fine they will further suffer three months S.I. each. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.2. Factual matrix leading to these appeals are that in the morning of 4.4.1997 the informant PW 8 was ploughing his land situated in Mauza Gahanadih, P.S. Gamharia while the deceased Guru Prasad Mahato alongwith his mother Shanti Mahatain was mending ridge of the fields nearby. As further stated at 7.30 a.m. appellant Shib Prasad Mahato arrived there and asked them not to dig the soil on which ...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Mokhtar HussaIn Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-16-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR361(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. While hearing I.A. No. 1341 of 2008 filed by the writ petitioner, learned Counsel appearing in the writ petition as well as in the interlocutory applications, which have been filed by the persons, who want to intervene in the matter and to be added as parties to the writ petition, agreed that the writ petition as well as interlocutory applications can be heard together and disposed of at this stage itself. With their consent and as agreed by them, all the said cases have been taken up together and the same are being disposed of by this common order.2. In the writ petition [W.P.(C) No. 1341 of 2007], the petitioner has prayed for a direction on the respondents to constitute on enquiry with a view to assess the actual potential of two Ferry Ghats, namely, Udhwa Ferry Ghat and Fudkipur Ferry Ghat, which fall within Udhwa Block in the district of Sahibganj.3. It has been stated that the said Ghats became useless for ferry purposes because of the construction...
Tag this Judgment!Kapildeo Prasad Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-15-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR55(Jhr)]
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. The petitioner in this writ application prays for quashing the order 2612 dated 30.8.2006 issued by the respondent No. 5 whereby the petitioner has been directed to superannuate from the post of Registrar on 31.8.2006 on his attaining the age of 60 years.2. The facts of the case stated precisely are as follows:3. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant professor cum Junior Scientist in the department of Soil, Science and Agriculture Chemistry and accordingly he joined the post on 6.8.1973 in the Birsa Rajendra Agriculture University.He was promoted to the post of Associate professor cum Senior Scientist on 6.8.1986 and subsequently he was promoted to the post of University Professor on 6.8.1994 and was discharging his duties accordingly.In the years 2005 an advertisement was issued by the respondent University vide advertisement No. 1 of 2005 inviting applications for the post of Registrar. The petitioner submitted his candidature and on being found eligible, he ...
Tag this Judgment!Madhu Sudan Mittal Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-15-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR60(Jhr)]
ORDER1. Heard, Mr. Mittal, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr.P. Singh, learned senior counsel appearing for the J.S.E.B., and the learned Advocate General for the State.2. The Board has filed an Interlocutory Application (LA. No. 1525/2008), requesting for issuance of direction to the Government for constitution of Special Courts as required under the provisions of Section 153 of the Electricity Act. 2003, for various Electrical Supply Areas, like Ranchi, Jamshedpur, Dhanbad, Hazaribagh and Medani Nagar.3. The Board has also filed supplementary affidavit, requesting for issuance of the same direction. According to the Board through affidavit and supplementary affidavit, supply of electricity to the consumer in Ranchi as well as to other parts of the State is badly affected due to rampant theft of electricity; theft of electricity causes huge losses to the Board; Part XV of the Act, 2003 provides for constitution of Special Courts for speedy trial of the offences under the Act, 200...
Tag this Judgment!Thakur Prasad Sao Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-15-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR23(Jhr)]
ORDERNarendra Nath Tiwari, J.1. These three cases have interwoven factual background. WP(C) No. 1460 of 2007 Is the origin for the Cont. Case (C) No. 220 of 2007 and WP(C) No. 4302 of 2007. The consideration, discussion and decision in the case of M/s. Thakur Prasad Sao WP(C) No. 1460 of 2007 have the direct bearing on the other two cases. In that view, all the three cases have been heard simultaneously with the consent of the parties and the same are being disposed of by this synchronic order.2. M/s. Thakur Prasad Sao, the petitioner in WP(C) No. 1460 of 2007, in his writ petition has sought quashing of the order of the State Government, respondent, dated 2nd March, 2007, whereby the application filed by the petitioner for renewal of the mining lease has been rejected without giving any heed to the order passed by the Central Government dated 5th August, 2005 while allowing the revision application of the petitioner as also the orders earlier passed by this Court on 12th December, 200...
Tag this Judgment!Mustafa Mian and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-15-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR44(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The above named two appellants were tried along with three other persons for the charges under Sections 148, 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code in Sessions Case No. 150 of 1998. Learned trial Court by the impugned judgment dated 16.7.2002 convicted the appellant Mustafa Mian for committing the offence under Sections 148 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code whereas, the appellant No. 2 Kalu Mian has been found guilty for the offence under Sections 148 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, the appellant No. 1 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and he, was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code. So far the appellant Kalu Mian is concerned, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years for the offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for one year...
Tag this Judgment!Rakhohari Gope and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-15-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR174(Jhr)]
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. In the instant writ application filed by way of public interest litigation, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the notification/resolution dated 30.9.2003 (Annexure-5) issued by the respondent No. 2, whereby rehabilitation policy earlier declared by the undivided State of Bihar in respect of displaced persons whose lands and houses were acquired for the purposes of the Subarnarekha Project was amended.The main grievance of the petitioner is that by introducing the amendment in the originally declared rehabilitation policy, the respondents have curtailed many advantages, benefits and facilities, which were given to the displaced persons under Annexure-2, resulting in irreparable loss and injury to the displaced persons.2. The facts stated briefly are that for the purpose of providing irrigation facilities to the vast tracts of the land in the Chhotanagpur region, the erstwhile undivided State of Bihar launched a project known as Subarnarekha Multi-purpose Proj...
Tag this Judgment!Swaraj Thackeray Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-15-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ3780; [2008(3)JCR66(Jhr)]
Amareshwar Sahay, J.1. The prayer of the petitioner in this application is to quash the entire criminal proceedings and also the order dated 11.4.2007 taking cognizance of the offences under Sections 153-A, 153-B and 504 of the Indian Penal Code in Complaint Case No. C/1-382/2007 pending before the Court of Sri B.C. Awasthi, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur.2. The facts of the matter are that the O.P. No. 2 Sudhir Kumar, a lawyer of Civil Court, Jamshedpur and spokesman of a political party namely R.J.D., filed a compliant case before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur against the petitioner Swaraj Thackeray @ Raj Thackeray making the following allegations:In the night of 9th March, 2007 at about 10.30 p.m. when the complainant was in his office, he was informed that the petitioner herein has made certain derelictory, defamatory, unconstitutional and illegal statements at a public meeting in Mumbai. which was being relayed by the T.V. channels. The complainant switched...
Tag this Judgment!Raj Narayan Pradhan and Ram Kishore Mishra Vs. State of Jharkhand and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: May-15-2008
Reported in: [2008(3)JCR280(Jhr)]
D.K. Sinha, J.1. Both the criminal revisions are taken together for disposal arising out of common judgment and order passed by the 2nd Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Criminal Appeal No. 51 of 2000, whereby and whereunder. though the conviction of the appellant Ram Kishore Mishra (petitioner in Cr. Rev. No. 922 of 2004) recorded by the trial Court in C-33/96 for the charge under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was affirmed but the compensation imposed upon the accused jointly to the tune of Rs. 2,42,000/- was reduced to the tine of Rs. 5,000/- upholding his sentence being one year rigorous imprisonment.2. Brief fact of the case as narrated in the complaint case No. C-33/96 by the complainant Raj Narayan Pradhan (petitioner in Cr. Rev. No. 836 of 2004) was that Ram Kishore Mishra (petitioner in Cr. Rev. No. 922 of 2004) and one Lalit Kumar Thakur (since dead) were Secretary and Treasurer respectively in Pandra Co-operative House Construction Committee. They jo...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »