Jharkhand Court September 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.
Dinesh Kumar Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-01-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI B.A.No.6393of2012 DineshKumarSingh Petitioner Versus TheStateofJharkhand OppositeParty ----- CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICEALOKSINGH ----- ForthePetitioner :Mr.MukeshKumar,Advocate FortheState :Mr.ManojKumarNo.4,A.P.P. 02/01.09.2012 Presentapplicationismovedseekingregularbailinconnectionwith BalidihP.S.CaseNo.124of20007correspondingtoG.R.No.1761of2007 registeredunderSections413/414/34oftheIndianPenalCode. Prosecution case in short is that on the basis of confidential informationreceivedon18.12.2007,raidwasconductedatthegodownofthe accused persons and on search, stolen scrap iron and imported Australian Coalhavebeenseized,whileaccusedpersonsmanagedtoflee. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and has no criminal antecedent.Hehasfurthersubmittedthatwithouttherebeinganyevidence, itcannotbesaidthatseizedscrapironandcoalwerestolenproperty.Hehas further stated that petitioner is in judicial...
Binay Kumar Sharma Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-01-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2321 of 2012 Binay Kumar Sharma . Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opp. Party. --- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE P.P.BHATT --- For the petitioner(s) : M/s Milan Kr. Dey, Sr. Adv., Arup Kr. Dey, Adv. For the Opp. Party : Mr. Mukesh Bihari Lal, APP. --- Order No.2 Dated 01st September, 2012 The present petition has been filed under Sections 438 and 440 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 67/2011, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 493 of 2011 for the alleged offence under sections 406, 409, 466, 468 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, which is pending in the court learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chaibasa. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Learned cousnel for the petitioner by referring Annexure-4 to this petition, pointed out that co-accused, Mahendra Mandal, who is similarly situated to the petitioner, was gran...
Khalil Mian and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-01-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI I.A.(Cr.)No.867of2012 In Cr.Appeal(DB)No.491of2009 1. KhalilMian 2. MansoorMian Appellants Versus TheStateofJharkhand Respondent CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL HONBLEMR.JUSTICEPRASHANTKUMAR FortheAppellants: Mr.M.K.Habib,Advocate FortheState: A.P .P. 05/Dated:1 st September,2012 Oralorder: PerD.N.Patel,J.:1. Thepresentinterlocutoryapplicationhasbeenpreferredbyapplicant no.2namelyMansoorMian,whoisoriginalaccusedno.2,underSection 389oftheCodeofCriminalProcedureforsuspensionofsentence,awarded bytheAdditionalSessionsJudge,FastTrackCourtIX,GiridihinSessions TrialNo.95of2007whereby,thepresentapplicanthasbeenpunishedfor theoffence mainlyunderSection302ofthe IndianPenalCodeandhas beensentencedtoundergolifeimprisonment.2. Havingheardcounselforboththesidesandlookingtotheevidences onrecord,itappearsthatthereisprimafacieacaseagainstthepresent applicant. Earlier twice the interlocutory applications preferred by the presentapplicantforsuspensionofsentencehasnotbee...
Dgm Hr and a Previously Known as Manager Works Gar Vs. Garh.Ship Build ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-01-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI I.A.No.1821of2012 IN L.P.A.No.252of2012 DGM(HR&A) Appellant Versus Mrs.TriptyPaul&others Respondents CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL HONBLEMR.JUSTICEPRASHANTKUMAR FortheAppellant:Mr.ArbindKumarSinha,Advocate FortheRespondents:Ms.LeenaMukherjee,Advocate 05/Dated:1 st September,2012 Oralorder: PerD.N.Patel,J.:1. Counselfortheapplicantisnotpressingthisinterlocutoryapplication preferredunderSection5oftheLimitationActbecauseasperthereportof thisCourt,thereisnodelay.2. Hence,thisinterlocutoryapplicationisdisposedofasnotpressed,at thisstage. L.P.A.No.252of2012 1. RegistryofthisCourtisdirectedtoenlistthisL.P.A.No.252of2012 undertheheadingForAdmissionon10thSeptember,2012. (D.N.Patel,J.) (PrashantKumar,J.) VK/...
Shailesh Kumar Prasad ? Shaile Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-01-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (C) No. 2807 of 2012 Shailesh Kumar Prasad @ Shailesh Prasad .. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand & Others .. Respondents ----- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI ----- For the Petitioners - Mrs. A.R. Choudhary, Advocate For the State - Mr. J.C to G.A. ----- 7/01.09.2012 Nobody appears on behalf of the contesting respondent No.3. Put up this case after two weeks. Until further order, the interim order dated 4th July, 2012 shall continue. (NARENDRA NATH TIWARI, J) Shamim/...
Balram Rout Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-01-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6349 of 2012. --- Balram Rout ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... ... ... ... ... Opposite Party. --- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Kailash Prasad Deo, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Gouri Shankar Prasad, Additional Public Prosecutor. --- 02. 01.09.2012. Mr. Gauri Shankar Prasad, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the opposite party, submits that he has called for the case diary of Jarmundi P.S. Case No. 09 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 60 of 2012, pending in the court of Shri S.P. Tripathi, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dumka, in writing but the Investigating Officer of the case has not sent the same and, therefore, he is not able to make statement before the Court today. This is a very serious matter. Learned Advocate General is requested to look into the matter and to issue necessary instructions to all the police o...
Raj Kumar Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-01-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2491 o1. Santosh Rajwar 2. Md. Niyaz ... ... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... ... Opposite Party --- CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY For the Petitioner : Mr. Pratiush Lala, Advocate For the State : A. P. P. 02/01.09.2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with the case registered under Sections 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that some of the villagers have said that they used to purchase the coal from the cyclist and tempo rider and stored the said coal in the land of Nunchand Rai and Ruplal Rai and also with the present petitioners. It is also contended that the coal seized from the land of the Nunchand Rai nothing has been recovered from the possession or land of the present petitioners. Furthermore, allegation which has c...
Ridhi Bhuian Alias Ridhi Bhuiyan Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-01-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No.5557 of 2012 ------ Ridhi Bhuian @ Ridhi Bhuiyan . Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr.S.S.Prasad, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. ------ 3/ 01.09.2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in Hariharganj P.S. Case No. 80 of 2011 corresponding to G.R No. 1865 of 2011 for the offence under Sections 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code. The case relates to road dacoity and it appears that the petitioner was apprehended at the spot by the police after exchange of fire between the culprits and the police party. In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, Ridhi Bhuian @ Ridhi Bhuiyan is hereby rejected. (H.C.Mishra, J.) B.S/...
Dharmendra Das Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-01-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No.5563 of 2012 ------ Dharmendra Das . Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr.Yogesh Modi, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. ------ 3/ 01.09.2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in Muffassil P.S. Case No. 32 of 2012 corresponding to G.R No. 245 of 2012, S.T Case No.192 of 2012 for the offence under Sections 302 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is the husband of the deceased and there is allegation against him to have committed murder of the deceased along-with the other co- accused due to some illicit relationship of the petitioner. The dead body of the deceased was found in the house of the petitioner with ligature marks. In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the p...
Safaque Begum Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-01-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI B.A.No.6430of2012 SafaqueBegum Petitioner Versus TheStateofJharkhand OppositeParty ----- CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICEALOKSINGH ----- ForthePetitioner :Mr.A.K.Sahani,Advocate FortheState :Mr.AnandKumarPandey,A.P.P. FortheInformant :Mr.AjayKumarSah,Advocate 02/01.09.2012 Presentapplicationismovedseekingregularbailinconnectionwith MangoP.S.CaseNo.170of2012correspondingtoG.R.No.1040of2012 registeredunderSection304BoftheIndianPenalCode. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that although F.I.R. in question was registered under Section 304B I.P.C., however, after investigation,policehassubmittedchargesheetfortheoffenceunderSection 498AreadwithSection306I.P.C.Hehasfurthersubmittedthattortureand harassment cannot be said to be abetment to commit suicide, unless it is proved that torture and harassment was of such high degree, which has derivedthedeceasedtocommitsuicide.Hefurthersubmitsthatpetitioneris themotherinlawofthedeceasedandisinjudicialcustodysince18.04...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »