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.
Raju Sinha Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 9834 of 2012 Raju Sinha ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party With B.A. No. 9852 of 2012 Manju Sinha ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA For the Petitioners :Mr. Pran Pranay For the State :A. P.P. ----- 02/19.12.2012 Both these bail applications arise out of the same case and as such they are being taken up together and disposed of by this common order. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution. Petitioners have been made accused for the offence under Section 20 of N.D.P.S. Act, in connection with Deoghar (Town) P.S. Case No. 362 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No. 1237 of 2012. From the F.I.R., it appears that about 1.848 Kg. of Ganja was recovered from the house of the petitioners. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners Raj...
Santoshi Kumari Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI Cr.Appeal(DB)No.815of2012 SantoshiKumari Appellant Versus TheStateofJharkhand ... ... ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL HON'BLEMR.JUSTICEPRASHANTKUMAR FortheAppellants: Mr.JitendraS.Singh FortheRespondent: Mr.T.N.Verma,A.P.P . OrderNo.9/Dated:19 th December2012 PerD.N.Patel,J1) Presentappealisadmitted.2) RecordsandproceedingsofSessionsTrialNo.99of2010hasalreadybeen calledforbythisCourtinCr.AppealNos.429&473of2012.Thesetwoappeals werepreferredbyoriginalaccusedNo.5&8.Presentcriminalappealhasbeen preferredbyoriginalaccusedNo.6.3) RecordsandproceedingsofSessionsTrialNo.99of2010ispresentbefore us, because papers of those criminal appeals were also tagged with present criminalappeal.4) We have perused the records and proceedings of the sessions trial and heardcounselforboththesidesatlength.Lookingtotheevidencesonrecordof thetrialcourt,thereisprimafaciecaseinfavourofthepresentappellant(original accusedNo.6).Asthecriminalappealispending,wearenot...
Dina Rana Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8598 o1. Dina Rana @ Dinesh Rana 2. Budhni Devi ..... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA For the Petitioners :Mr. Hemant Kr. Shikarwar For the State :A. P.P. ----- 03/19.12.2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution. Petitioners have been made accused for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 324, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Barkagaon P.S. Case No. 62 of 2007, corresponding to G.R. No. 1298 of 2007. From the F.I.R., it appears that the petitioners were already on bail and their bail bonds were cancelled on 09.12.2010 for misuse of privilege of bail. Thereafter, the petitioners surrendered on 17.09.2012 and they are in custody since then. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners Dina Rana @ Dinesh Rana and Budhni Devi are directed...
Kunal Bhardwaj Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI Cont.Case(Cr.)No.6of2012 KunalBhardwaj Petitioner Versus TheStateofJharkhand&ors. Respondents CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL HON'BLEMR.JUSTICEPRASHANTKUMAR ForthePetitioner : Mr.KripaShankarNanda,Advocate FortheState : Mr.R.Mukhopadhyay,Advocate 05/Dated:19 th December,2012 PerD.N.Patel,J.:1. Learnedcounselfortheapplicantsubmittedthatthiscontemptcriminal case is not tenable and, therefore, liberty may be given to convert this applicationintocontemptcivilcase.2. Havingheardlearnedcounselforboththesidesandlookingtotheorder, forthenoncomplianceofwhichthiscontemptapplicationhasbeenpreferred,it appearsthatthiscontemptcriminalcaseisnottenable,atlawand,hence,this contemptapplicationis,hereby,dismissed,withoutenteringintomeritofthe case. The applicant is at liberty to file proper application before appropriate forumwithproperaverments,allegationsandannexures. (D.N.Patel,J.) (PrashantKumar,J.) Ajay/...
Bishehswar Prasad Vs. Shyam Sundar Prasad
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. W.P. (C) No. 4635 of 2012 Bisheshwar Prasad @ Bisheshwar Prasad Sinha Petitioner -V e r s u s- Shyam Sundar Prasad Respondent. CORAM: - HONBLE MR. JUSTICE P.P. BHATT. For the Petitioner : - Mr. B. K. Sinha, Advocate. 06/03.12.2012 With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, put up this case in the third week of January, 2013. Ad interim order dated 22.08.2012, passed earlier shall continue till the next date of listing. (P.P. Bhatt, J.) APK...
Pradeep Kumar Pandey Vs. Rahul Kumar Purwar and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI Cont.Case(Civil)No.665of2012 PradeepKumarPandey Petitioner Versus AradhnaPatnaik&Another . OppositeParties CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL ForthePetitioner:Mr.K.K.Ambastha,Advocate FortheState :J.C.toA.A.G. 03/Dated:3 rd December,2012 1. CounselfortheStateisdirectedtofileshowcause.2. Postthismatteron7thDecember,2012.3. PresenceoftheDeputyCommissioner,Lateharisnotrequiredtill furtherorders. (D.N.Patel,J) VK...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›