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.
Hadina Khatoon Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-11-2011
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHICr.M.P.No.1337of2009MadinaKhatoon..................... Versus StateofJharkhand&Ors; Coram: HonbleMr.JusticeR.K.Merathia Petitioner Opp.PartiestHon'bleMr.JusticeP.P.BhattForthePetitioner FortheState OrderNo.04 I.A.No.2052of2009 :Mr.VijayKr.sharma,Advocate :Mr.APP Datedthe11October2011 th HeardMr.VijayKr.Sharma,learnedcounselforthepetitoneron theprayerforcondonationofdelayaswellasonthemeritofthecase. Thispetitionhasbeenfiledforgrantofleavetoappealagainstthe judgment of acquittal dated 27/06/2009, passed by the SubDivisional JudicialMagistrate,ChatrainComplaintCaseNo.74/2006,T.R.No.450of 2009. Afterhearingthecounselforthepetitionerandongoingthrough theimpugnedjudgmentofacquittal,wefindthatthelearnedtrialcourthas rightlyacquittedtheaccusedpersonsfromthecharges.Ithasinteraliaheld thatitiscrystalclearthatthereisenmitybetweenthepartiessincelong duetowhichthiscomplaintcasewasfiledbythecomplainantonlywitha viewtosaveherownskinfromthecaselodgedbytheaccusedpersons...
Duryodhan Gope Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-11-2011
INHIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 6772 of 2011 Duryodhan Gope ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA -----For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. V.S.Sahay, A.P.P.------THE4/ 11.10.2011 Prosecution.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the The petitioner has been made accused for the offence underSections 387, 353 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Ichagarh P.S. Case No. 17 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. No. 330 of 2011. There is direct allegation against the petitioner to have forcibly taken money from several beneficiaries of the Indira Awas Yozna. In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner, Duryodhan Gope, on bail at this stage. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected at this stage.R.Kr.( H. C. Mishra, J.)...
Rajendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-11-2011
INHIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 6911 of 2011 Rajendra Yadav ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA -----For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra S. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. J. Mahto, A.P.P.------THE2/ 11.10.2011 Prosecution.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the The petitioner has been made accused for the offence underSections 15 and 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, in connection with Chandwa P.S. Case No. 25 of 2008 corresponding to N.D.P.S. Case No. 17 of 2008. It is alleged that the petitioner was involved in cultivation of posta plant. However, from the F.I.R. itself, it is apparent that the petitioner was not apprehended at the spot. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner, Rajendra Yadav, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000...
Anwar Ansari Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-11-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 6830 of 2011 ------Anwar Ansari .. Petitioner -Versus...... Opposite Party -----CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA -----For the Petitioner : Mr.Niraj Nayan Mishra, Advocate For the State : Mr.S.N.Rajgharia, A.P.P. -----2/ 11.10.2011 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.54 of 2011 corresponding to G.R No.898 of 2011 for the offence under Sections 25 (1-B)(a), 26, 35 of the Arms Act. Petitioner was apprehended on 24.5.2011 and from the possession of this petitioner, one loaded country made pistol and three cartridges were recovered. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner Anwar Ansari is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st...
Md.Siddique Khan Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-11-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6945 of 2011 Md. Siddique Khan Versus The State of Jharkhand CORAM: . Opposite Party HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA : : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey A. P.P. ..... PetitionerFor the Petitioner For the State 2/11.10.2011----Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections underProsecution. Section 25(1-B)(a)/26 of the Arms Act, in connection with Bistupur P.S. Case no.126 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. No.1583 of 2011. Fire arm was recovered from the co-accused and the FIR clearly shows that there was no recovery of any incriminating article from this petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner Md. Siddique Khan 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 Ch...
Katan Singh @ Ketan Singh @ Katak Singh and ors Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-11-2011
1. 2. 3. 4.IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 6837 of 2011 ------Katan Singh @ Ketan Singh @ Katak Singh Meeru Lal Singh Yugal Hembrom Singrai Murmu .. Petitioners -Versus-.... Opposite Party -----CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA -----For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mr.Md.Hatim, A.P.P. -----2/ 11.10.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioners have been made accused in Borio P.S case no.198 of 2010 corresponding to G.R No.442 of 2010, S.T No.90 of 2011 for the offence under Sections 302, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is alleged that on 28.11.2010, deceased had gone to the market and while he was returning, he was surrounded by these petitioners and the petitioner Katan Singh @ Ketan Singh @ Katak Singh assaulted the deceased , causing injury on his neck. Thereafter, the deceased came to one of his friend and he went to the hospital. He was referred to other hospitals for bett...
Tanweer Akhtar Surizai Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-11-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6947 of 2011 Tanweer Akhtar Surizai Versus The State of Jharkhand CORAM: . Opposite Party HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA : : Mr. Peeyush Krishna Choudhary A. P.P. ..... PetitionerFor the Petitioner For the State 4/11.10.2011----Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under SectionsProsecution. 341/323/498/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Mango P.S. Case no.313 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. No.1606 of 2011. The petitioner is the elder brother-in-law of the informant who has alleged that this petitioner had also subjected her to cruelty and torture for the demand of dowry. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner Tanweer Akhtar Surizai 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 t...
Danial Ansari @ Danial Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-11-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6935 of 2011 Danial Ansari @ Danial Versus The State of Jharkhand CORAM: . Opposite Party HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA : : Mr. Santosh Kumar A. P.P. ..... PetitionerFor the Petitioner For the State 2/11.10.2011----Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 413/414Prosecution. of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Nirsa (Kalubathan) P.S. Case no.58 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. No.1135 of 2011. Some coal was recovered on boat and the police party was informed by the persons nearby that the petitioner was involved in the illegal transaction of the coal. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner Danial Ansari @ Danial 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 satisfac...
Ajit Kumar Mahto Vs. State of Jhaekhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-11-2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5745 of 2011 With B.A No. 4603 of 2011 ------Lalku Mahto .. Petitioner (B.A NO.5745/11) Ajit Kumar Mahto ....... Petitioner (B.A NO.4603/11) -VersusThe State of Jharkhand through Vigilance...... Opposite Party -----CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA -----For the Petitioner : Mr.Atanu Banerjee, Advocate (B.A No.5745/11) M/s.A.K.Kashyap, Sr.Advocate, Lina Shakti, Advocate. (B.A No.4603/11) For the State : Mr.Nilesh Kumar, Spl.P.P., Vigilance. -----6/ 11.10.2011 Both the aforesaid cases arise out of the same case and they are being disposed of by this common order. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Special P.P for the Vigilance. The petitioners have been made accused in Vigilance P.S case no.68 of 2010 corresponding to Special Case No.85 of 2010, for the offence under Sections 403, 406, 409, 120B, 467, 468, 471 and 109 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 7/ 13(2) read with 13 (1) (D) (C ) of Prevention of Corrup...
Sidhi Kumar @ Sambhu Kumar @ Vidhayak Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Oct-11-2011
INHIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 6185 of 2011 Sidhi Kumar @ Sambhu Kumar @ Vidhayak ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA -----For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhiram Anand, Advocate For the State : Mr. D.K.Prasad, A.P.P.------THE3/ 11.10.2011 Prosecution.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the The petitioner has been made accused for the offence underSections 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Jasidih P.S. Case No. 163 of 2004 corresponding to G.R. No. 684 of 2004. The case relates to dacoity in a Bank and from the F.I.R., it appears that soon after the occurrence, the petitioner was apprehended and he was also identified by the Bank officials. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 21.9.2004 and has prayed for bail. Taking into consideration the period of custody, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner, Si...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »