Jharkhand Court September 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.
Sharad Kumar and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand Through Cbi
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-02-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR539(Jhr)]
ORDERR.R. Prasad, J.1. This application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the order dated 2.6.2000 (Annexure-2) passed by learned Special Judge in Misc. Case No. 156 of 1996 whereby ad-interim order relating to attachment of the property in question was made absolute in terms of Section 5 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 1944. Further order dated 15.10.2004 (An-nexure-4) has also been sought to be quashed whereby prayer made by the petitioner to recall the order attaching the property was refused and consequently receiver was appointed.2. The fact giving rise this application is that CBI filed an application on 29.8.1996 under Section 3 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance stating therein that one Dr. Gouri Shankar Prasad while was serving as District Animal Husbandry Officer, Chaibasa and also in other capacities, was found indulging himself in fraudulent withdrawal of huge amount from the Government Exchequer in conspiracy wi...
Jagarnath Mishra College Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-02-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR614(Jhr)]
ORDERR.R. Prasad, J.1. This writ application has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of. certiorari for quashing the warrant of attachment (Annexure-12) issued by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II-cum-Recovery Officer, Ranchi, whereby the fees/dues receivable by the College-Authority from the students/parents of wards/guardian of students were attached in exercise of power under Section 8-B to 8-C of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) In order to recover a sum of Rs. 28,21,829/-due from the management of M/s. Jagarnath Mishra College, Chalnpur, Daltonganj, Palamau.2. The case of the petltioner-Jagarnath Mishra College, Chalnpur, Daltonganj, Palamau is that it is an affiliated College under the Jharkhand Intermediate Academic Council and has been engaged in providing education to the students upto intermediate and it is being managed by Jagarnath Mishra Siksha Vikas Samiti, a registered Soci...
Gobardhan Mahto Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Limited and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-02-2008
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR464
ORDERR.R. Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the office order as contained in memo No. 134 dated 25.4.2006 (Annexure 3) issued by respondent No. 4 whereby and whereunder petitioner was made to retire on 30.11.2006 taking the date of birth of the petitioner as 21.11.1946 which was never recorded in Form 'B' register or in other service excerpt, rather in those documents age of the petitioner has been recorded as 32 years as on 13.1.1981.2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was employed on 30.1.1981 in Lohapati Colliery, a unit of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited as under ground Trammer. Thereupon, service excerpt was prepared on 22.3.1987 wherein age of the petitioner was recorded as 32 years as on 13.1.1981 in Form 'B' register. Accordingly, in the identity card the same age was recorded but all on a sudden, the petitioner was served with a notice on 25.4.2006 as contained in Annexure 3 whereby pet...
Chandan Jha Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-02-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR521(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Nobody appears on behalf of the parties.2. Since the application is pending for admission since 2003 and nobody is appearing for the petitioner, and therefore it is being disposed of on the basis of the material available on record at this stage.3. In this application the petitioner is challenging the order dated 12.12.2000 taking cognizance for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.4. It appears that a complaint was filed by one Reshmi Khatoon against Chandan Jha (petitioner) alleging therein that she was a young unmarried lady belonging to a poor family working as a maid servant at a house near Muraroi Police Station, and the accused Chandan Jha was employed as a jeep driver in the office of the Block Development Officer, Maheshpur. It is further alleged that Chandan Jha used to come to the said police station and in course of which he happened to meet the complainant, Reshmi Khatoon and then he developed intimacy with her resulting in his...
Dinesh Kumar Jalan Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-02-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR476(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. In both the petitions, the facts and points raised are same and similar and the parties are also the same and therefore, both the petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. In these petitions, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 11.7.2007 passed by the SDJM Pakur in PCR Case No. 34/2006 and PCR Case NO. 35/2006 respectively whereby, the learned SDJM Pakur rejected the petitions filed by the petitioner purported to be under Section 251, CrPC for discharge of the accused persons and for closing the prosecution.3. The relevant facts in short are that the complaint Ashok Kumar filed two complainant cases against the petitioner Dinesh Kumar Jalan, being PCR Case No. 34 of 2006 and PCR Case No. 35 of 2006. In PCR Case No. 34 of 2006, the complainant alleged inter alia that that on 20th May, 2003, the complianant being the owner of M/s. Ashoka Stone Works transferred the entire assets of M/s. Ashoka Stone Works by a Re...
Arun Kumar Verma and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-02-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR500(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioners have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of their criminal proceedings in Forest Case No. 232 of 1998 for the alleged offence under Section 33 of the Indian Forest (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1989 and under Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class Giridih in T.R. No. 1385 of 2004.2. The petitioners had earlier moved before this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 8131 of 1999 R which was disposed of on 11.1.2000 with the liberty to the petitioners to raise all the points before the Court below at the time of explaining the substance of accusation and it was directed to the Court below to pass appropriate order in accordance with law on proper verification of the allegation levelled against them.'3. The learned Counsel Mr. Deepak Kumar submitted that the petitioner No. 4 M/s. Kariya Tari Mica Mining Company Ltd. was a lessee since time...
Gopi Das @ Gopi Mahra and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-02-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR514(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard.2. The petitioners are challenging the order dated 18.4.2002 taking cognizance for the offences under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act as well as the order dated 22.7.2003 by which the petition filed under Section 245, CrPC for discharge was rejected.3. According to the complaint-petition, the complainant negotiated the marriage of his daughter, namely Inarwa Devi with the accused No. 5, Mahesh Mehra (Petitioner No. 5 herein). The accused Nos. 1 and 2, namely, Gopi Mahara and Rukmani Devi (Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 herein) accepted the offer of the complainant for marriage. The accused Nos. 2 to 5 namely, Rukmani Devi, Naresh Mahara, Meena Devi and Mahjesh Mahara came to the village Piparbadiya to see the complainant's daughter and thereafter agreed to marry their son with the daughter of the complainant. It is said that Rs. 51,000 as expenses for the marriage along with the wrist watch and bicycle was given to t...
Sukomal Baul and ors. Vs. State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand)
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-02-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR622(Jhr)]
1. This appeal under Clause 10 of the letters patent Is directed against the order dated 21.11.1994 passed by the learned single Judge modifying the decree passed in F.A. No. 24 of 1986(R) under the Land Acquisition Act. It appears that the land measuring 1.46 acres belonging to the claimants/appellants were acquired in the year 1959-1960 and the valuation of the said land was determined by the Land Acquisition Officer at Rs. 4,672/- taking into consideration the land of Tanr 2. The appellants being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, made objection which resulted a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The learned Special Judge, Land Acquisition, disposed of the reference case enhancing the valuation of the land at the rate of Rs. 18,000/- per acre in terms of the judgment dated 21.6.1984 and accordingly the said Court made an award dated 1.7.1984. The Court also awarded 15% additional compensation on the increased amount under Section 23 of the said Act a...
Sri Ram Sagar Singh and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-02-2008
Reported in: [2008(4)JCR619(Jhr)]
ORDERR.R. Prasad, J.1. The petitioners are the teachers posted in different High School in the territory of the State of Jharkhand and they by virtue of the Resolution No. 6022 dated 18.12.1989 (Annexure-I) issued by the Department of Finance, Government of Bihar were promoted to selection grade in between 1986 and 1992 and accordingly fixation of the salary was made. Subsequently, the Government of Jharkhand came with the resolution as contained in Memo No. 7946 dated 16.11.2000, whereby decision was taken that the flxation of salary made pursuant to the Resolution No. 6022 dated 18.12.1989 (Annexure-1) needs to be re-fixed in terms of the Resolution No. 1000 dated 20.2.1993 (Annexure-2). Consequently, decision was also taken to recover the amount which has been paid in excess from the salary bill of March 2001.2. Being aggrieved with those orders, I he petitioners have preferred this writ application.3. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that certain persons aggrie...
Kashi Nath Upadhyay Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-01-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ473; [2008(4)JCR236(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner Kashi Nath Upadhyay has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of the entire criminal proceeding arising out of Topchanchi P.S. Case No. 182 of 2005 corresponding to G.R No. 4835 of 2005 for the offence under Sections 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 pending in the Court of SDJM, Dhanbad wherein, cognizance of the offence was taken on 15.6.2006.2. The prosecution story in short was that the informant Nipa Upadhyay presented a written report before the Of-ficer-in-charge of Gomo police station on 12.12.2005 narrating therein that she was married to one Tarkeshwar Upadhyay son of the petitioner Kashi Nath Upadhaya on 10th February, 2003. On the eve of her marriage, sufficient dowry as per demand in cash as well as in kind including Jewelleries, cloths and utensils were given. After her marriage she went to her matrimonial ho...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »