Jharkhand Court June 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.
Nitya Nand Choudhary Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-16-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State as also the learned counsel for the informant. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bariatu P.S. Case No. 58 of 2011 for the alleged offences under sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner admits that the petitioner had received the amount of Rs. 11,00000/- from the informant for the execution of the sale deed, but the sale deed was not executed in his favour. Learned counsel for the informant has also appeared in this case. 3. From the order dated 09.06.2011, it appears that the learned counsel for the petitioner had given an undertaking in the Court that he is ready either to refund the money back to the informant or to execute the sale deed. Today, learned counsel for the informant submits that he is ready to take back the money from the petitioner. 4. However, the petitioner has difficulty in returning back the money to the informant in one ...
Cardinal Telesphore P. Toppo @ Telesphore P. Cardinal Toppo Vs. State ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-16-2011
1. The petitioner has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for the quashment of the order dated 21.01.2011 by which the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi found a prima facie offence alleged against the petitioner and others under Sections 453/295A/298 read with 120B of the Indian Penal Code to proceed against them in Complaint Case No.1314 of 2010. 2. The prosecution story as narrated in the complain in short was that the complainant was an association of members of Scheduled Tribes being the follower of "Sarna Religion", an association duly registered under the Societies Registration, Act, 1860. Such society was formed for literacy, scientific, charitable and religious purpose viz. for the upliftment of social, educational, economic growth of the members of the Scheduled Tribes, who were the followers of "Sarna". The complainant further explained that the followers of "Sarna" were having their own customs in religious and socia...
Chandni Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-16-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Giridih (M) P.S. Case No. 255 of 2010 for the alleged offences under sections 341, 323, 342, 379, 504, 147 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. There are allegations of assaults against the petitioners. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner nos. 3, 4 and 5, Haroon Rashid @ Md. Haroon Rashid, Md. Adil Rashid @ Md. Adil Rashi and Md. Pintoo and as such, their prayers are accordingly rejected. If the petitioner nos. 3, 4 and 5, Haroon Rashid @ Md. Haroon Rashid, Md. Adil Rashid @ Md. Adil Rashi and Md. Pintoo surrender before the court below and pray for regular bail, the learned court below shall consider their defence and pass necessary orders in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order of rejection. 4. However, petitioner nos. 1 and 2, Chandni @ Chandani ...
Gulenoor Bibi Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-16-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Sarwan (Sonaraithari) P.S. Case No. 134 of 2009 for the alleged offences under sections 409, 420 and 120 B of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The motorcycle of the husband of the petitioner was stolen away for which a Police case was lodged, which was subsequently recovered in Bengal. The present case has been instituted by the Investigating Officer of the said case, stating that the persons, from whom the motorcycle was recovered, are the relatives of the petitioner and her husband and a false case of theft of the motorcycle was lodged due to the fact that there was some allegation of defalcation of money in the School in which the petitioner is the teacher and she has taken the plea that the voucher was stolen away along with the motorcycle. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this c...
Bajrangi Prasad Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-16-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Godda (T) P.S. Case No. 397 of 2000 for the alleged offences under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 337, 353, 333, 307, 504 and 188 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. It is alleged that on 18.12.2000, there was a 'Band' called by the Communist Party of India (Male) and there was a mob, which was being led by the local M.L.A. From the F.I.R., it appears that there was an altercation between the mob and the Police, in which there is omnibus allegation against the persons in the mob to have thrown the brickbats etc. and in retaliation, the Police had also taken the course of Lathi charge and firing to disburse the mob. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of surrender/arrest, the petitioner Bajrangi Prasad Yadav shall be released on bail on f...
Court on Its Own Motion Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-13-2011
1. On 04.04.2011, a Division Bench of this Court comprising the then Hon'ble the Chief Justice took cognizance of the news paper report published in the “Prabhat Khabar” who pointed out that the public sector units in the State of Jharkhand namely Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd.(H.E.C. Ltd.), Central Coal Fields Limited(C.C.L. Ltd.), Bokaro Steel Ltd.(B.S.L.), Bharat Coking Coal Limited(B.C.C.L.) have permitted the unauthorized persons to remain in possession of public properties, without there being any entitlement and directed to issue notice to the above public sector units to show cause why they have permitted such unauthorized persons to remain in possession of these premises. This Court also sought clarification from State authorities why the authorities not be penalized for permitting unauthorized persons to remain in possession. 2. On 08.04.2011, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the H.E.C. Ltd. and B.S.L. has assured this Court that by 19.04.2011 they will ...
Md. Pappu Rabbani Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-10-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Petitioners have been made accused in connection with Kenduadih P.S. Case No. 71 of 2010 for the offence under Sections 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25 (1-B) A/26 (2) (3) and 35 of the Arms Act. 2. According to the prosecution's case, when a manufacturing unit of the illegal country made firearms was raided, petitioners have been found working in the said factory. Some arms which were in the process of manufacturing and the tools for manufacturing of the arms were also recovered from the said factory. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. It has been further submitted that one Md. Gulam Rasool, whose case is similarly situated to the petitioners, has already been granted bail by this Court in B.A. No. 514 of 2011 by order dated 18.05.2011. 4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petiti...
Bali Rajwar Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-10-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has been made accused in connection with Silli P.S. Case No. 02 of 2011 for the offence under Sections 328 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. According to the prosecution's case, the petitioner who was a carpenter by profession arranged a feast in his house in which his family members and some persons including the informant Jitendra Bediya have taken meal and drink. 3. It is alleged that the drink was spurious and after taking the drink, all the persons who had taken the drink fell ill and ultimately, four persons died including the mother of the petitioner, who had also taken the meal and the drink. 4. The father of the petitioner, who had also taken the drink and the meal, fell ill. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is actually the victim of the circumstances and he had taken the drink from one Government shop, which ultimately became spurious and four persons died in...
Dhuni Ram Hembrom and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-10-2011
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail filed by the petitioners in connection with Parsudih (Sundar nagar) P.S case No. 61 of 2011 (GR No. 602 of 2011)for the offences registered under sections 147/149/506/427/353 IPC, pending in the Court of the learned CJM, Jamshedpur. 2. There is allegation in the written report that the petitoners, after forming an unlawful assembly, committed rioting and mischief by demolishing the panchayat Mandap which was under construction. 3. They had also damaged the stock of cement kept at the place. It is submitted that the petitioners have committed no offence and no offence under section 353 IPC is attracted against the petitioners on the basis of the allegation made in written report. As a matter of fact, the petitioners had made objection against the inferior quality of construction and therefore they have been implicated in this case. 4. Considering ...
Rajesh Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-10-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioner has been made accused for the offence registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 353, 307, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act and Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, in connection with Chainpur P.S. Case no. 43 of 2008 corresponding to G.R. No. 380 of 2008, which was instituted on the basis of written report given by A.S.I. of Chainpur Police Station, wherein it was stated that he got a secret information that some landlines were planted by the terrorists and in the first information report, the name of the persons who had planted the land mines and who allegedly are the members of the terrorists group has been given. 3. The said land mine was subsequently exploded and no one has been arrested from the spot. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of suspici...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »