Jharkhand Court April 2009 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.
Balram Mandal Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-02-2009
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR479(Jhr)]
Pradeep Kumar, J.1. The revision is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 19.1.2007 passed by chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in G.R. case No. 1340/2004 and T.R. No. 1457 of 2007 by which judgment he found the petitioner, Balram Mandal guilty under Sections 466/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo S.I. for 2 years under all the three sections. However, all the sentences were directed to run concurrently and against the Judgment in appeal passed by Sri Sunil Kumar Singh, Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C., 1, Dhanbad in Cr. Appeal No. 32 of 2007 dated 24th May, 2007 by which Judgment he found the appellant guilty under Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo S.I. for 2 years. However, he acquitted the petitioner under Section 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code.2. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the main point in revision is that there is no evidence that the petitioner was know...
Sulendar Sahu @ Surendar Sahu Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-02-2009
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR489(Jhr)]
Pradeep Kumar, J.1. The appeal is directed against the judgment dated 5.9.2001 and order of sentence dated 6.9.2001 passed by Shri R.P. Shrivastava, IVth Additional Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Session Trial No. 498 of 1999, by which Judgment the learned Sessions Judge found the appellant guilty under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and convicted him there under and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 10 years.2. The prosecution case was started on the basis of a fardbeyan given by the informant, Leela Kumari on 12.3.1999 stating therein that she is aged about 15 years and her parents work as labourers and they used to do labour-works outside her house and the victim alone used to live in her house. On 8.10.1998 when she was alone in her house then accused, Sulendra Sahu @ Surendra Sahu came to her house and wanted to drink water. When, she was going Inside the house for to bring water then the accused brought out a knife and at the point of knife he committed rape upon her. She...
Samundri Devi Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-02-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR1973
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1 .The present writ petition has been preferred for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing the final statement under Section 11(1) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) published in the District Gazette dated 16.12.1989 (Annexure-11) whereby and whereunder the lands belonging to the petitioner and purchased by way of registered documents have been declared as surplus in the hands of the land holder (respondent No. 5) without any notice or opportunity of hearing much less initiating any proceeding in terms of Section 5(iii) of the Act, although the lands in question have been in peaceful possession of the petitioner ever since the dates of their respective purchases and their names have also been mutated and also if need be, for quashing the entire proceedings of L.C. Case No. 24/73 in so far as the ...
Arbind Prasad Bhagat Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-02-2009
Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR1970
ORDERAjit Kumar Sinha, J.1. In the instant writ petition the petitioner prays for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction for quashing the office order No. 07/2004 as contained in Memo No. 353, dated 24.08.04 issued under the signature of respondent No. 2. The petitioner prays for a further writ, order or direction restraining the respondents permanently from acting pursuant to and in furtherance of the impugned order dated 24.08.04.2. The facts, in brief, are set out as under:The petitioner was appointed in accordance with the applicable rules as Dalpati on 03.09.1983 on the recommendation of the Mukhiya within the meaning of Rule 3 & 4 of Bihar Panchayat Village Volunteer Force Rule, 1949 on the recommendation of the Committee vide letter No. 57 dated 5.11.1983. The petitioner was approved by the District Panchayat Raj Officer, Santhal Pargana, Dumka. According to him he fulfilled all the criteria and requirement as prescribed in Rule 3 & 4 having his age between 21 to 30...
Most. Madhuri Devi Vs. Paras Nath Keshari and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-01-2009
Reported in: [2009(2)JCR481(Jhr)]
ORDERM.Y. Eqbal, J.1. Speedy disposal of cases with responsive and timely Justice is the call of the day and for achieving this goal, a number of Seminars, Workshops, deliberations and discussions are being held throughout the country both at national level as also State level in order to find out the reasons, ways and means to overcome these problems.2. So far the pendency of cases in the High Courts particularly of this Court is concerned, according to me, one of the reasons is in the posting of inexperienced and untrained officers on the post of Section Officer, Administrative Officer and Stamp Reporter who are the part and parcel of 'Administration of Justice'. Those Class II senior officers posted as Administrative Officer, Section Officers and Stamp Reporters are responsible for making the cases ready after pointing out the defects in the applications, appeals, review petitions, etc. and also after giving report with respect to the Court fee stamp and other charges payable for su...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›