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.
Yugeshwar Mehta 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. 2. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail filed by the petitioners in connection with Nagaruntari PS Case No.25 of 2011 (GR No. 138 of 2011) for the offences registered under sections 379/411 IPC and Sections 4 and 54 fo the Jharkhand Minor Minerals Concession Rules, 2004 pending in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Garhwa . 3. It appears from the FIR that tractors belonging to the petitioners were found transporting stone chips without valid documents. It is submitted that the petitioners were not at all present at the time of seizure of the tractors. 4. The drivers were carrying valid challans which were allegedly given to them by the lease holder. It is submitted that the petitioners cannot not be held liable if the documents issued for transporting the stone chips were not genuine. 5. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, both the petitioners ...
Mrs. Nivha Sinha Vs. Ranjit Prasad
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-09-2011
1. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is a woman residing at Giridih at her parental house and she has no source of income. It is also submitted that petitioner has filed a Miscellaneous Case at Giridih under Section 125 of the Cr. P.C. in which maintenance of of Rs. 1500/- awarded in her favour from the date of application (6.5.2008), but in spite of said order, up till now respondent/opp. party has not paid a single penny. Accordingly, it is submitted that petitioner is not in a position to pursue case of Bokaro, hence it is prayed that Matrimonial Title Suit No. 242 of 2009 be transferred in the court of Principal Judge Family Court Giridih. 2. On the other hand, Sri Atanu Banerjee, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/opp. party submits that in pursuance of the order dated 8.9.2010 in Miscellaneous Case No. 335 of 2008, respondent/opp. party had sent a draft of Rs. 9,000/- to the petitioner, but the same has been returned. He further submi...
Dilip Singh and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-09-2011
1. This application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Ranka P.S. Case No. 185 of 2009 (G.R. Case No. 1590 of 2009) registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 386, 407, 506 and 307 I.P.C. pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Garhwa, has been filed on behalf of petitioners, named above. 2. There is allegation in the written report that all the accused persons after forming unlawful assembly made an attempt on the house of informant and started indiscriminate firing. They have also committed mischief by damaging vehicles parked near the house. 3. It is submitted that due to political rivalry this case has been instituted and no case under Section 307 I.P.C. is made out because nobody has sustained any injury. The nature of offence and allegations levelled do not suggest this case fit to be considered under Section 438 Cr.P.C. 4. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected. The petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned court...
Phudan Murmoo Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-09-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner is accused in a case registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 504, 353 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. 2. There is allegation that the petitioner with his associates has created nuisance in course of public hearing held at Turamdih Mines Coloney Foodball Ground at the instruction of the district administration. 3. It is alleged that the accused persons had scuffled with the police officials and assaulted employees of U.C.I.L. and they have been demanding to withdraw the proceedings initiated under Section 107 Cr.P.C. against the petitioner and other accused persons. 4. It is submitted that the petitioner is aged 62 years and he is a practicing lawyer. It is further submitted that no overt act is attributed against the petitioner. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances appearing from the First Information Report and also considering the fact that petitioner is a practicing advocate and it is expected that he would abide by t...
Manoj Kumar Singh and anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-09-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioners are accused in connection with Jamua P.S. Case No.215 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No.2129 of 2010 registered under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 4/21 of Mines and Minrals Act and Section 33 of the Forest Act which is pending in the Court of learned which is pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih. 2. It reveals from the self-statement of Inspector Mukund Singh that trucks loaded with steam coal plying without papers have been seized. Out of trucks seized, truck bearing registration No.HR 37B-3782 belongs to pettioner No.1 whereas truck bearing registration No.JH 10R-2626 belongs to petitioner No.2 and both the trucks were loaded with 25 tonnes of steam coal. 3. It is submitted that the petitioners were not apprehended at the spot and they have no concern with the illegal trade of coal. It is further submitted that other coaccused having more or less similar allegations have been gran...
Lalan Yadav Vs. the state of jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-07-2011
1. The petitioner is an accused in a case registered under Sections 498A/379/504/323/34 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 2. There is allegation against the petitioner in the complaint that he has been committing torture on his wife for want of more dowry and finally the wife was driven out from her matrimonial home. 3. It is submitted that this case has been filed after 10 years of the marriage with the general allegation of demand of dowry and torture. It is further pointed out that petition filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was disallowed because the complainant refused to live with the the petitioner without assigning any valid reason. 4. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, the petitioner, named above, is directed to surrender in the court below within two weeks from today and on such surrender, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri...
Ramashish ram Vs. the state of jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-07-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Sections 147/148/149/452/323/427/436/379 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act. 2. Allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner and others put fire in the house of the informant and also looted the family members. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the accused Kanhai Sao, Munshi Ram and Murali Singh were tried by judgment dated 05.02.2011 in Sessions Trial No. 171 of 2010 and they were acquitted. Petitioner is a photographer and ...
Smt. Kiran Jha and ors. Vs. the state of jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-07-2011
1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, learned counsel appearing for the informant and learned A.P.P. appearing for the State. The petitioners are accused in a case instituted under Sections 147/148/149/323/307/341/342/452/387/504/380/427/436 of Indian Penal Code. 2. Mr. B.M. Tripathy, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that on 4.3.2011, maid servant of Mr. Vikram Sinha (son of the informant) fell down on the ground from Balcony of the house as a result of which, she died. On such happening, petitioner no. 1, a social activist and a next door neighbour of the informant, suspected some foul play and hence, approached the informant and asked him to make payment as compensation to the family members of the deceased. 3. When nothing was done in this respect, it is alleged that petitioner no. 1, her daughter-petitioner no. 2, a student, and her maid servant-petitioner no. 3 along with other 15 to 20 unknown persons came there and broke open the doo...
Santosh Hembram and ors. Vs. the state of jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. appearing for the State. 2. The petitioners are accused in a case instituted under Sections 3/4 of Explosive Substance Act and Section 17 (i)(ii) of C.L.A. Act. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that it is the case of the prosecution that on the confession made by petitioner no. 1- Santosh Hembram, some jiletins and a cane bomb were recovered from a hillock but for that, the petitioners have sufficiently been punished as petitioner no. 1 as well as petitioner no. 2, who never confessed his guilt, have remained in custody for about nine months and that the antecedent of these petitioners is quite clean. 4. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, both the above-named petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Ma...
Misbahul Islam and ors. Vs. the state of jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-06-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioners are accused in connection with Katkamsandi (Pelawal) P.S. Case No.253 of 2010, corresponding to G.R. Case No.3386 of 2010, registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 353, 352, 153(A), 436, 427, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section ¾ of D.P.P. Act, 1984 which is pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh. 2. According to the F.I.R., the petitioners with their associates formed unlawful assembly, created road blockade and raised slogans against the police administration. 3. The mob set on fire motorcycles and police vehicles and also pelted stones on the police party. The assemblage was in connection with communal disturbance. 4. It is submitted that some of the accused, who were also named, have been granted regular bail by the Court below. The allegation against all the accused is almost similar in nature and hence the petitioners...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »