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.
Md.Rafique Alam Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(S)No.3467of2004 Md.RafiqueAlam ...Petitioner Versus TheStateofJharkhand&others......Respondents CORAM:HONBLEMR.JUSTICEAPARESHKUMARSINGH ForthePetitioner :Mr.RamNivasRoy,Adv. FortheRespondents:J.C.toAAG 12/19.12.2012 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has no instruction to press this writ application. Learned counsel for the respondentsispresent. Accordingly,thiswritapplicationisdismissedasnotpressed. (ApareshKumarSingh,J) jk...
Ram Kailash Durbey Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1169 of 2003 Ram Kailash Durbey Appellant. -Versus- The State of Jharkhand. .... Respondent. ------ CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY ------ For the Appellant : Mr. Rajeeva Sharma, Sr. Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. ------ I.A. No.1801 o6. 19.12.2012: In this I.A., the appellant has prayed for his release on bail during pendency of the appeal. It has been submitted that though the appellant's prayer for bail was earlier rejected, he has remained in custody for more than twelve 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. Learned A.P.P. opposed the appellant's prayer for bail, but has not disputed the said facts and contentions. Regard being had to the long custody, the appellant is directed to be released on bail during pendency of the appeal on furnishing ba...
Ashok Bhagat Alias Ashok Yadav Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 8767 of 2012 --- Ashok Bhagat alias Ashok Yadav Applicant Versus The State of Jharkhand Opposite Party --- CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH --- For the Applicant : Mr. R. S. Mazumdar, Senior Advocate For the Opposite Party : Mr. Prakash Kr. Sahay, A.P.P. --- 4/19.12.2012 This is an application seeking regular bail in connection with Pratappur P.S. Case No. 34 of 2009 corresponding to G.R. No. 625 of 2009 for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act, Section 17 (I) (ii) of the C.L.A. Act, Section 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act and Section 10/13 of the U.A.P.A. Act. Undisputedly, trial is going on and out of 13 witnesses, 7 witnesses have already been examined. Considering the gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail, therefore, application for bail is rejected. However, learned trial court is directed to ma...
Bigan Mohli Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI Cr.AppealNo.800of2008 BiganMohli .... .... . Appellant Versus TheStateofJharkhand .... .... . Respondent CORAM :HON'BLEMRS.JUSTICEJAYAROY FortheAppellant :Mr.AtanuBanerjee,Advocate FortheState :A.P.P. 06/19.12.2012 I.A.No.1595of2012 HeardcounselfortheappellantandcounselfortheState. Instantinterlocutoryapplicationhasbeenfiledforgrantof bailtotheappellant. Counselappearingfortheappellanthassubmittedthatthe prayer for bail of the appellant was earlier rejected twice lastly on 14.07.2009.Itisalsosubmittedthattheappellantisincustodysince lastfourandhalfyearsi.e.from16.06.2008.Hehasfurthersubmitted thatduringinvestigationtheappellantremainedincustodyforabout sixmonths.Thus,hehasalreadyservedhalfofthesentenceawardedto him. Counsel appearing for the State has opposed but not disputedtheaforesaidcontentionsmadebythecounselappearingfor theappellant. Consideringtheperiodofcustodywhichisfiveyearsand thustheappellanthasalreadyservedhalfofthesentenceawardedto him,du...
Jhubar Mahto Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3788 of 2012 ---- Jhubar Mahto .... ... ... .... Petitioner ---Versus--- The State of Jharkhand .........Opposite Party ---- CORAM: HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE JAYA ROY ---- For the Petitioner : Mr. Md. Sajid Yunus, 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 147, 149, 323, 379, 385 of the I.P.C., pending in the court of J.M., Hazaribagh. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has been falsely implicated in this case as because he was not ready to sell the lands to the company owners. It is also submitted that in the investigation, the said fact has also come. Counsel for the State has filed the counter affidavit and submitted that the present petitioner is the owner of certain portion of the land, which the company owners wanted to purchase and as because he has refused to sell the land, the inf...
Uday Chandra Prasad and Others Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P. No.1583 o1. Uday Chandra Prasad 2. Radha Kumari 3. Nirmala Devi............................................Petitioners VERSUS State of Jharkhand an another ...................Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioners:Mr. A.K.Verma For the State : Mr.V.K.Gupta, A.P.P For the O.P.No.2 :6. 19.12.12. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2. This application has been filed for quashing of the first information report of Sadar P.S. Case no.555 of 2009 registered under Sections 406, 419, 420,467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The case of the complainant as it appears from the complaint petition is that the petitioners though had no right, title and interest over the piece of land appertaining to holding no.116, plot no.349A situated at Jhandachawk, Police Station- Sadar, District-Hazaribagh entered into an agreement with the compl...
Laldeo Nagesia Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1725 of 2004 Laldeo Nagesia Appellant. -Versus- The State of Jharkhand. .... Respondent. ------ CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY ------ For the Appellant : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. ------ I.A. No.1141 o9. 19.12.2012: In this I.A., the appellant has prayed for his release on bail during pendency of the appeal. It has been submitted that though the appellant's prayer for bail was earlier rejected, he has remained in custody for more than ten 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. Learned A.P.P. opposed the appellant's prayer for bail, but has not disputed the said facts and contentions. Regard being had to the long custody, the appellant is directed to be released on bail during pendency of the appeal on furnishing bail bond of Rs...
Shankar Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3449 o1. Shankar Yadav 2. Malti Devi 3. Ashok Yadav .... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand & another ... Opposite Parties Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mrs. Sarita Gupta For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 19.12.2012 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 Deoghar (Kunda) PS case No. 219 of 2012 for the offence registered under sections 498A/34/341/323 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioners have been prosecuted for causing torture and assault to the informant. It is submitted that the allegation of assault is against the husband, but all the family members have been implicated with general and omnibus allegation. Learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer and submitted that specific allegation is also against the mother in law Malti Devi. Sinc...
Punia Devi Vs. B.S.R.T.C. Th Administrator
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (S) No. 2124 of 2004 --- Punia Devi --- --- --- ---- Petitioner Versus Bihar State Road Transport Corporation through Administrator, Patna & others --- --- Respondents --- CORAM: The Honble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh For the Petitioner: Mrs. M.M. Pal, Sr. Advocate, Mr. A.C. Mahato & Mrs. Leena Mukherjee, Advocates For the BSRTC: Mr. P.P.N. Rai, Sr. Advocate --- 06/ 19.12.2012 Heard counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner-wife of deceased employee of the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, has approached this court in the present writ application for a direction upon the respondents to pay all post retiral dues such as GPF, gratuity, leave salary, salary from January to October 1995, bonus, etc, on the basis of the family certificate issued by the Circle Officer.3. The petitioner's husband was discharged from service on 14th August 1999 and he passed away on 20th August 1999.4. Respondents have appeared and filed their counter aff...
Raj Narayan Pathak Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Dec-19-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3406 of 2012 Raj Narayan Pathak .... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mr. Indrajit Sinha For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 19.12.2012 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner in connection with Sadar PS case No. 161 of 2006 for the offence registered under sections 406/409/420 of the Indian Penal Code. It reveals from the FIR that irregularities were found in purchase of books in Jharkhand Education Project Council and books were purchased for more than the budget allocated. During investigation, it was detected that the petitioner being the resource person has also ordered for supply of books to Rajkamal Prakashan and Radha Krishna Prakashan and therefore his involvement has also surfaced. It is submitted that the petitioner ...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »