Jharkhand Court October 2011 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.
Rajesh Sundi @ Rengo Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-10-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6057 of 2011 Rajesh Sundi @ Rengo Versus The State of Jharkhand CORAM: . Opposite Party HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA :Mr. Pravin Kumar :A. P.P. ..... PetitionerFor the Petitioner For the State----3/10.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution. Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Section 394 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Noamundi P.S. Case No. 58 of 2010, corresponding to G.R. No. 434 of 2010. The case relates to dacoity in which Rs. 6,50,000/- was looted from the bank officials while they were going to feed the cash in the ATM box. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and, accordingly, has prayed for bail. From the impugned order and the case diary, it appears that on the basis of confessional statement of this petitioner Rs. 20,000/- was recovered after digging the earth under a tree...
Paiyan Godsora @ Sidiyu Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-10-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 6104 of 2011 ------Paiyan Godsora @ Sidiyu Petitioner -VersusThe State of Jharkhand CORAM : ...... Opposite Party -----HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA -----For the Petitioner : Mr.D.K.Chakraverty, Advocate. For the State : Mr.M.B.Lal, A.P.P. -----3/ 10.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in Saraikella P.S case no.45 of 2011 corresponding to G.R No. 427 of 2011 for the offence under Sections 302, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. There is direct allegation against the petitioner and his two sons to have assaulted the deceased causing his death. F.I.R is lodged by the wife of the deceased who is an eye witness to the occurrence. In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner Paiyan Godsora @ Sidiyu is hereby rejected.(H.C.Mishra, J.)B.S/...
Ram Kishun Lahkar and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-10-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M.P. No. 1494 of 2008 with I.A. No. 1608 of 2011 1. Ram Kishun Lahkar 2. Champa Devi 3. Lalita Kumari v. 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Sarita Devi CORAM:...Petitioners..Opposite PartiesHON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: For the State: For the O.P. No. 2: Miss Usha Srivastava Mr. A.K. Jha , APP Mr. Sanjay Kumar12/10.10.2011:I.A. No. 1608 of 2011 has been filed for disposal of thiscase as well as G.R. Case No. 978 of 2007 corresponding to T.R. No. 946 of 2008 pending in the court of Sri Santosh Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribagh , in terms of compromise. All the concerned parties are present in court physically and on querry, they stated that the parties had compromised the case due to intervention of their friends between them. This is a case under section 498A, 323, 504, 494 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. Thus, the dispute between the parties is their personal dispute and no public policy involved in it....
Md.Sultan Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-10-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2632 of 2011 -----Versus -----.... ...Md. Sultan. ........ ...Petitioner Opp. PartyThe State of Jharkhand CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY -----For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate Mr. S.N.P. Roy, Advocate For the Opp. Party : A.P.P. ----03 /10.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner is accused in a case registered under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. There is allegation against the petitioner that he has been committing torture on the complainant for want of more dowry. It is submitted that the petitioner happens to be father-in-law and he has no concern with the demand of dowry, if any, made by the husband from the complainant. As a matter of fact the petitioner had tried to pacify the matter but due to attitude of the complainant the matter could not be settled. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel, above n...
Raj Narayan Khaware @ Bablu Khaware Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-10-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7451 of 2011 Raj Narayan Khaware @ Bablu Khaware ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA :Mrs. Sandhya Sahay :A. P.P.For the Petitioner For the State----2/10.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution. Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 353, 336, 447, 225, 109, 427, 506/505 (B) of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Deoghar Nagar P.S. Case No. 277 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. No. 759 of 2011. From the FIR, it appears that the petitioner was apprehended in connection with another case and while he was kept at the police station, a mob came to free him and they also used force against the police party and committed mischief. It is alleged that the petitioner was instigating the mob. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely impli...
Ramamamd Dubey Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-10-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 6788 of 2011 ------Ramanand Dubey .. Petitioner -VersusThe State of Jharkhand CORAM : ...... Opposite Party -----HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA -----For the Petitioner : Mr.Pankaj Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr.S.Maji, A.P.P. -----2/ 10.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in Patan P.S case no.101 of 2010 corresponding to G.R No.1516 of 2010, S.T No.238 of 2011 for the offence under Sections 302, 201, 376, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The case relates to the murder of the widow daughter and grand-daughter of the informant and the petitioner has been named in the F.I.R, alleging that the informant had learnt that his daughter had some illicit relationship with the petitioner. Petitioner has been named in this case on the basis of suspicion. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and th...
Bom Chatterjee @ Subhankar Chatterjee and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-10-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 6460 of 2011 ------1. Bom Chatterjee @ Subhankar Chatterjee 2. Ram Kumar Nishad .. Petitioners -Versus...... Opposite Party -----CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA -----For the Petitioners : Mr.D.K.Chakraverty, Advocate For the State : Mr.A.K.Prasad, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Ananda Sen, Advocate -----3/ 10.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant. The petitioners have been made accused in Jugsalai (Bagbera) P.S case no.76 of 2011 corresponding to G.R No.1039 of 2011 for the offence under Sections 341, 342, 323, 347, 379, 384, 34 of the I.P.C. In the F.I.R, there is allegation against these petitioners to have assaulted and injured the informant namely Shambhu Nath Kumar and one Ashok Mittal and also to have taken their signatures on stamp papers and cheques. It appears from the case diary that the occurrence had taken place due to some business riv...
Chhotu Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-10-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6816 of 2011 Chhotu Kumar Versus The State of Jharkhand CORAM: . Opposite Party HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA : : Mr. Prabir Chatterjee A. P.P. ..... PetitionerFor the Petitioner For the State 2/10.10.2011----Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 414 ofProsecution. the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Katras P.S. Case no.159 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. No. 2276 of 2011. One truck loaded with some bags of coal was apprehended which was found to be stolen. In the FIR, it has come that the coal was loaded by this petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner Chhotu Kumar is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magis...
Gidani Soren and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-10-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6802 of 2011 1. Gidni Soren @ Gidhani Soren 2. Mukund Hansda Versus The State of Jharkhand CORAM: ..... . Petitioners Opposite PartyHONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA : : Mr. Lakhan Chandra Roy A. P.P.For the Petitioners For the State 2/10.10.2011----Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the Petitioners have been made accused for the offence under SectionsProsecution. 341/323/504/34/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Palajori P.S. Case no.100 of 2010, corresponding to G.R. No.430 of 2010, S.T. No.29 of 2011. The petitioners are the daughter and son-in-law of the deceased and from the FIR it appears that the family members including these petitioners assaulted the deceased as he was in habit of drinking. This occurrence had taken place on 14.9.2010 and even thereafter the deceased was living properly in his house. The condition of the deceased deteriorated on 17.09.2010 and he was brought to hospita...
Ranjeet Jaiswal @ Ranjeet Kumar Jaiswal Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-10-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6770 of 2011 Ranjeet Jaiswal @ Ranjeet Kumar Jaiswal ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA :Mr. Surendra Prasad Sinha :A. P.P.For the Petitioner For the State----2/10.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution. Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code later on added Section 7 E.C. Act, in connection with Lesliganj P.S. Case No. 68 of 2010, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 2036 of 2010. The case relates to recovery of certain items from the house of one Niranjan Prasad Jaiswal which were supposed to be stolen items. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner Ranjeet Jaiswal @ Ranjeet Kumar Jaiswal is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,0...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »