Jharkhand Court December 2012 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.
Dhaneshwar Yadav Alias Kargil Jee Alias Kargil Yadav Vs. the State of ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8715 of 2012 Dhaneshwar Yadav @ Kargil Jee @ Kargil Yadav..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA For the Petitioner :Mr. Jitendra Shankar Singh For the State :A. P.P. ----- 03/19.12.2012 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, 452, 380, 427, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 / 4 of Explosives Substance Act, in connection with Balumath P.S. Case No. 32 of 1999, corresponding to G.R. No. 389A of 1999 (S. T. No. 109(A) of 2007). The petitioner was on bail and it appears that his bail bond was cancelled on 17.08.2011 and subsequently, the petitioner was remanded in this case on 06.06.2012. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner Dhaneshwar Yadav @ Kargil Jee @ Kargil Yada...
Amit Das Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 8764 of 2012 --- Amit Das Applicant Versus The State of Jharkhand Opposite Party --- CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH --- For the Applicant : Mrs. Vandana Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sadhna Kumar, A.P.P. --- 3/19.12.2012 This is an application seeking regular bail in connection with Chas P.S. Case No. 150 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 810 of 2012 for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. has corroborated prosecution story and has stated that she was called by the accused in his house and after giving her intoxicant cold drink had committed rape upon her without her will and consent. Considering the gravity of the offence and specific statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, application of bail is rejected. (Alok Singh, J.) R...
Hira Lal Ram Vs. Human Resource Development
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (S) No. 7342 of 2012 --- Hira Lal Ram Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Human Resources Development Deptt., Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi 3. Secretary, HRD Deptt., Ranchi 4 .Director, Higher Education, HRD Deptt., Ranchi 5 .Sido Kanhu Murmu University, Dumka 6. Vice Chancellor, Sido Kanhu Murmu University, Dumka 7. Registrar, Sido Kanhu Murmu University, Ranchi Respondents --- CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate For the State : Mr. Purnendu Sharan, J.C. to Sr.S.C. II For Sido Kanhu Murmu University : M/s. M. S. Anwar, Sr. Advocate & Pramod Kumar Choudhary, Advocate --- 2/19.12.2012 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has already moved a representation, annexure no. 4 to the writ petition before the respondent no. 4 on 13.12.2011, however, no action has been taken thereon as yet. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 1, 2, 3 & 4 submits t...
Shyama Devi Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3800 of 2012 ---- Shyama Devi ... ... ... .... Petitioner ---Versus--- The State of Jharkhand ......... .........Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE JAYA ROY ---- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajan Raj, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. ---- 3 / 19.12.2012 Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. The petitioner is accused in this case registered under Section 302/34 of the I.P.C., pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is the married sister in law and she is residing separate from the victim lady though in the same Angan but she has no concern with the victim lady and her husband. It is also contended that the alleged occurrence has taken place after ten years of marriage and earlier no any panchayati or any case was filed regarding any torture or demand of dowry. Counsel for the State has pointed out that there is spe...
Jai Prakash Narayan Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3724 of 2012 ---- Jai Prakash Narayan Singh ... .... Petitioner ---Versus--- The State of Jharkhand .........Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE JAYA ROY ---- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. ---- 3. / 19.12.2012 Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was not in the post at the relevant time when the irregularities were made. Counsel for the State Mr. Shekhar Sinha, APP, prays for time for filing counter affidavit in this case. Put up this case on 16th January, 2013. Till that date, police will not arrest the petitioner namely Jai Prakash Narayan Singh in connection with the present case i.e. Sahibganj (T) P.S. Case No.178 of 2011, G.R. No.458 of 2011, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sahibganj. Counsel for the petitioner will deposit the cost of the fax to communicate this o...
Ruben Minz Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(S)No.4069of2010 RubenMinz ... Petitioner Versus TheStateofJharkhand&Ors. ... ... ... Respondents CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICEALOKSINGH ForthePetitioner :Mr.SauravArun,Advocate FortheState :Mr.ArvindKumarMehta,J.C.toS.C.(Mines) FortheStateofBihar :Mr.S.P.Roy,G.A.,Bihar I.A.No.3188of2011andI.A.No.1643of2012 06/19.12.2012 Bywayofpresentapplications,petitionerisseekingamendmentinthe writpetition. Forthereasonsstatedintheapplications,amendmentsoughtseemsto bejustandproperforfairadjudicationofthecase. Consequently,boththeI.As.areallowed. W.P.(S)No.4069of2010 Let amended writ petition be placed on record on or before 10th of January, 2013 with an advance copy to the learned counsel for the respondents. Letcounteraffidavittotheamendedwritpetitionbefiledwithinnext fourweeks. Rejoinderaffidavit,ifany,maybefiledwithinfourweeksthereafter. (AlokSingh,J.) Manish...
Azad Mian and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No.163 of 2006 Azad Mian & Ors. Appellants. -Versus- The State of Jharkhand. .... Respondent. ------ CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY ------ For the Appellants : Mr. A.K. Chaturvedi, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. ------ I.A. No.1734 o15. 19.12.2012: In this I.A., the appellant no.3 namely Rahamtali Mian has prayed for his release on bail during pendency of the appeal. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that though the appellant's prayer for bail was earlier rejected, he has remained in custody for seven years; there is no likelihood of the appeal being taken up for hearing in near future; the appellant, thus, deserves to be released on bail pending hearing of the appeal; the other co-convicts have been released on bail. Learned A.P.P. opposed the appellant's prayer for bail, but has not disputed the said contentions. Regard being had to the long custody, t...
Anindya Biswas Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3392 of 2012 Anindya Biswas .... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand & another ... Opposite Parties Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mr. J.S. Tripathy For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 19.12.2012 After seeking consent from both sides, petitioner as well as the complainant are directed to appear before the Mediation Centre, Civil Court at Jamshedpur, on 04.01.2013. The Mediator/Conciliator shall make all efforts to settle the matter between the parties and thereafter send the result of conciliation to this Court . Put up this case under the same heading after receipt of the aforesaid report on 10.01.2013 Till the next date, interim order passed on 01.10.2012 shall continue. Ambastha/- ( D.N.Upadhyay,J.)...
Ragho Singh and ors Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 4098 of 2011 Ragho Singh ..... Petitioner Versus 1. State of Jharkhand 2. The Deputy Commissioner, Gumla, 3. The Circle Officer, Gumla 4. Reyauddin 5. Nasima Bano 6. Nazmal Hoda . Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE P. P. BHATT For the Petitioner :M/s Sunil Kumar & Manoj Kumar Singh Advocates. For the Respondents No. 1 to 3 :Mr. S. Chaudhary, G.A. For the Respondents No. 4 to 6 :None ----- 17/19.12.2012 The petitioner, by way of filing the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 09.06.2011 passed by respondent no. 3 in Miscellaneous Case No. 1 of 2011-12 which, according to the present petitioner, is in violation of principle of natural justice, as no opportunity of being heard was given to the petitioner. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as respondents-State of Jharkhand, and on perusal of the material on record, it a...
Hiro Ram Alias Hero Ram Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8710 of 2012 Hiro Ram @ Hero Ram ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA For the Petitioner :Mr. Jyoti Prasad Sinha For the State :A. P.P. ----- 03/19.12.2012 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, 323, 307, 332, 353, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, Section 17 C.L.A. Act, Sections 3, 4, 5 of the Explosive Substance Act and Section 27 of the Arms Act, in connection with Bishnugrah P.S. Case No. 08 of 2008, corresponding to G.R. No. 173 of 2008 (S. T. No. 227A of 2010). From the F.I.R., it appears that though the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and there was an encounter between the Police party and the members of the extremist group, but the extremists however, managed to flee away and it also appears that no one has injured in the Police side. In the fa...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »