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.
Rama Shankar Singh and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-17-2012
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P.No.1055 of 2011 With Cr.M.P.No.1059 of 2011 With Cr.M.P.No.1335 o1. Rama Shankar Singh 2.Chandra Prakash Pandey......Petitioners (In all cases) VERSUS State of Jharkhand and others.Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR.JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioners :Mr.Indrajit Sinha For the State :Mr.R.Mukhopadhyay, S.C.II 3.17.9.12. Since common issues are involved in all these cases, they are taken up together for hearing on the point of admission and are being disposed of by this common order. By invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding of B.F.case Nos. 9, 10 and 12 of 2011 including the orders whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 33 and 63( C) of the Indian Forest Act and also under Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act has been taken against these petitioners, in the aforesaid cases lodged separately but on a common allegati...
Premlata Kumari and ors Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-17-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M.P. No.762 o1. Premlata Kumari 2. Laxmi Narayan Machua 3. Sonali Kumari @ Sonali Sandhya 4.Sunita Kumari 5. Manoj Kumar Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand & Anr. Opp. Parties ----- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. J.S. Singh Advocate For the State : APP ----- 04/17.09.2012: In spite of service of notice, nobody appeared on behalf of the Opp. Party No.2. Hence, heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and State. This application has been filed for quashing of the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No.85 of 2011 including the order dated 22.03.2011 whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offence punishable under Sections 420/465/467/468 of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against these petitioners. Case of the complainant is that one Sahajman Devi claiming herself to be the wife of Sukru Sahu, transferred a piece of land bearing Plot No.1534, appertaining to Khata No.91, measuring a...
Phatik Kanti Gon Vs. Smt.Chanchala Devi and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-17-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(C)No.2028of2012 PhatikKantiGon. ...Petitioner. Versus Smt.ChanchalaDevi&Anr. ...Respondents. CORAM:HONBLEMR.JUSTICENARENDRANATHTIWARI ForthePetitioner : Mr.ManojTandon,Advocate FortheRespondents : Mr.K.P.Deo,Advocate 08/17.09.2012: Thepetitionerisaggrievedbytheorderdated16thMarch, 2012,wherebythepetitioner'sevidencehasbeenclosedandhis statement given in examinationinchief has been expunged behindthebackofthepetitionerandthecasehasbeenfixed forargument.2. Ithasbeensubmittedthatthesaidorderhasbeenpassed onthegroundthattheoppositeparty(petitionerherein)wasnot appearing for his further crossexamination. It has been submitted that two previous dates have been taken into considerationbylearnedcourtbelowi.e.20thJanuary,2012and 20th/21stFebruary,2012.On20thJanuary,2012thelawyerswereon strike and due to the said reason, the petitioner could not appear in the court below. On 20th/21st February, 2012, the PresidingOfficerwasoncasualleaveandthepetitioner'scro...
Bijay Yadav Alias Bijay Gope Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-17-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2240 of 2012 Bijay Yadav @ Bijay Gope .... Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand & another ... Opposite Parties Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): MrA.K.Chaturvedi 3. For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 17.09.2012 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 Tandwa P.S.case no. 67 of 2011 for the offence registered under sections 498A /323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It reveals from the written report that a sum of Rs. 50,000/- was demanded on loan from Pankaj Kumar in the marriage of the daughter of the informant. Thereafter, husband and in laws have started demanding said sum of Rs. 50,000/- from the informant and asked her to bring the said amount from her parents. It is submitted that marriage was solemnized about 22 years ago and because of failure to pay back the said...
Raj Kamal Gope Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-17-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No.5388 of 2012 ------ Raj Kamal Gope . Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr.Jai Shankar Tripathi, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. ------ 6/ 17.09.2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in Bero P.S. Case No. 47 of 2008 corresponding to G.R No. 3008 of 2008 for the offence under Sections 302, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 27 of the Arms Act and 17 of the C.L.A Act. The case relates to murder of husband of the informant who was murdered by the members of the extremists group for demand of levy. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R itself, to be one of the assailants. The informant is an eyewitness to the occurrence. In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, Raj K...
Ranchi Goshala and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-17-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(C)No.4251of2007 RanchiGoshala&anr. ...Petitioners Versus TheUnionofIndia&others ...Respondents CORAM:HONBLEMR.JUSTICEAPARESHKUMARSINGH ForthePetitioners :Mr.RohitRoy,Adv. FortheRespondents :J.C.toS.C.(L&C) 3/17.09.2012 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits by referringtoAnnexure2,whichisadocument,showingrentrolldetermined underSections6or7oftheBiharLandReformsAct,1969,underRule7Ithat thelands,inquestion,remainedinpossessionoftheholderasaRaiyatafter vestingofZamindariandtheRespondentsStatewasnotentitledtotreatitasa GairmajuruaMalikLandbeingGovernmentlandforthepurposesofstarting theconstructionoftheKasturbaGandhiGirl'sSchool. LearnedcounselfortheRespondentsState,however,isnotabletomake specificanswertotheaforesaidcontentionastheaffidavitfiledonbehalfofthe State,doesnotaddressthesame. Inthatviewofthematter,twoweeks'timeisallowedtothecounselfor theRespondentsStatetofilespecificreplyinrespectoftheavermentsmade. Tillthen,theinte...
Radho Paswan Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-17-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No.5820 of 2012 ------ Gunjan Kumar Goyal @ Gunjan Kumar . Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------ CORAM : THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr.Nilesh Kumar, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. ------ 5/ 17.09.2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in Lohardaga P.S Case No.136 of 2010 corresponding to G.R Case No.470 of 2010 for the offence under Sections 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code. There is direct allegation against the petitioner to have committed gang rape upon the victim. In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner, Gunjan Kumar Goyal @ Gunjan Kumar is hereby rejected. (H.C.Mishra, J.) B.S/...
S.M.international Ltd. Vs. Bihar State Credit and Investmen
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-17-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C). No. 3933 of 2006 S.M. International Ltd. Petitioner Versus The Bihar State Credit & Investment Corporation Ltd., Patna & Others ......... Respondents ---------- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Petitioner : M/s Sunil Kr. Agarwal & Ramakant Tiwary For the Respondents : Mr. Amit Kumar Das ----------- 06 /17.09.2012 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The writ petition has been preferred for restraining the respondents from taking action against the petitioner in view of the letter dated 13.4.2006 and 17.4.2006 ( Annexure-9 and 11 respectively) as, according to the petitioner he is ready and willing to pay the balance amount of Rs.12.43 lakhs within a period of 3 months from 31.3.2006 and if not acceptable otherwise he is even ready to pay the amount in one go. Petitioner has also sought for quashing of the said letter dated 13.4.2006 whereby it was communicated to the petitioner that if the entire amount outstandin...
Employers in Relation to the M Vs. their Workman Sri Pankaj Kumar
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-17-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(L) No.7444 of 2011 Employers in relation to the management of Swang Washery of M/s Central Coalfields Ltd. petitioner -Versus- Their Workman Sri Pankaj Kumar ...Respondents. ------ CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI ------ For the petitioner : For the Respondents : ------ I.A. No.2767 o5. 17.09.2012: Nobody appears on call. This I.A. is rejected for non-prosecution. (Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.) Shamim/...
Anant Mandal and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-17-2012
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI Cr.Appeal(DB)No.638of2011 1.AnantMandal 2.IshwarMandal Appellants Versus TheStateofJharkhand Respondent CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL HON'BLEMR.JUSTICEPRASHANTKUMAR FortheAppellants :Mr.KailashPrasadDeo,Advocate FortheState :Mr.G.S.Prasad,A.P.P. 05/Dated:17 th September,2012 OralOrder PerD.N.Patel,J.:1. Thepresentappealhasbeenadmittedvideorderdated3rdJanuary,2012. RecordsandproceedingsoftheS.C.No.211of2008/S.T.No.15of2011was called for from the trial court to appreciate the argument of suspension of sentence.2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants for the prayer of suspension of sentence awarded to the present appellants, who are original accusednos.3and4.Thesetwoappellantshavebeenconvictedfortheoffence punishableunderSection302tobereadwithSection34oftheIndianPenal CodeandtheyaresentencedforLifeImprisonmentbylearned1st Additional District&SessionsJudge,Goddabythejudgmentofconvictionandorderof sentence dated 2nd December, 2011 and 5th Dec...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »