Jharkhand Court January 2013 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.
Arun Sahu Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI A. B. A. No. 3082 of 2012 With A. B. A. No. 3266 o1. Tileshwar Sahu ... Petitioner (In A.B.A. No. 3082/2012) 2. Arun Sahu 3. Yugal Kishore Sahu 4. Deepak Ohdar @ Deepak Kr. Nag 5. Sulendra Sahu Petitioners (In A.B.A. No. 3266/2012) Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party (In both cases) CORAM: THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR ............ For the Petitioners : M/s Anil Kumar, Shashi Kumar (In both cases) For the Opp. Party : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, A.P.P. (In A.B.A. No. 3082/2012) Mr. V.K. Tiwary, A.P.P.(In A.B.A. No. 3266/2012) ........ 4/10.01.2013 Both the applications arose from the same F.I.R., thus, are heard together and disposed of by this order. Anticipatory bail applications filed by Tileshwar Sahu, Arun Sahu, Yugal Kishore Sahu, Deepak Ohdar @ Deepak Kr. Nag and Sulendra Sahu, in connection with Kamdara P.S. Case No. 53 of 2008 corresponding to G.R. No. 1035 of 2008 pending in the court of S.D.J.M. Gumla, is moved by Sri Anil K...
Sachidanand Mohanty Vs. Rukmini Mohanty
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI F.A. No. 206 of 2008 Sachidanand Mohanty ....Appellant Versus Rukmini Mohanty Respondent -------- Coram: THE HONBLE MR JUSTICE P.P. BHATT -------- For the Appellant : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate For the Respondent : (I.A. No. 70 of 2013) /10.1.2013: Present interlocutory application has been filed, under Order XXIII, Rule 3 of CPC read with Section 151 of CPC, inter alia, stating that the parties to the proceedings i.e. husband and wife have amicably settled the disputes and have entered into terms and conditions of the compromise, as stated in paragraph-5 of the interlocutory application. Therefore, learned counsel for the parties have jointly requested that this application is bona fide and in the interest of justice, it may be allowed and compromise arrived at between the parties may be accepted and decree for divorce dissolving the marriage between the parties may be passed. The contents of the interlocutory application are supported by aff...
Bijay Sao Alias Prasad Alias Vijay Sao Alias Pd Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
IN THE HIGHCOURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A.No. 3371 of 2012 ----- Bijay Sao@Prasad@VijaySao@Pd. Petitioner. Versus The State of Jharkhand Opposite Party. . ..... Coram : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar. ----- For the Petitioner : Sri. Nilesh Kumar For the State : Sri.Tapas Roy, A.P.P. ----- 03/10.01.2013. Anticipatory bail application filed by Bijay Sao@Prasad@ VijaySao@Pd. is moved by Sri. Nilesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and opposed by Sri. Tapas Roy, Addl P.P. for the State. It is alleged that on the raid of police two carom board, two solar lamp and a paper showing distribution of blankets recovered from his house. Police suspect that the said articles belongs to extremists. Accordingly, petitioner implicated in this case. There is no material in the case diary to show that the aforesaid articles belong to extremists. From perusal of antecedent report at flag-A, it appears that petitioner has no criminal history. Considering the aforesaid fact and circumst...
Bhola Paswan Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 1578 of 2008 --- Bhola Paswan --- --- ---- Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary, Department of Personnel, Administrative Reforms and Rajbhasa Deptt. & others --- --- Respondents --- CORAM: The Honble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh For the Petitioner:Mr.Shresth Gautam&Mr.Sumantra Sinha, Advocate For the State: Mr. Piyush Chawla, JC to GA --- 04/ 10.01.2013 Heard counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order contained in Memo dated 12th April 2007 issued by the Sub Divisional Officer, Bokaro whereby his application for grant of caste certificate has been rejected on the ground that he was not able to submit the required documents such as caste certificate and copy of the Khatiyan. The petitioner has also prayed for consequential order upon quashing of the impugned order to direct the respondents to issue caste certificate to the petitioner of caste to which he belongs i.e. 'Dusadh' whic...
Awadh Dental College and Hospital Vs. Health and Family Welfare
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (C) No. 5360 of 2012 --- Awadh Dental College & Hospital, Jamshedpur Petitioner Versus Union of India through the Secretary Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Govt. of India, New Delhi Respondent --- CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Sujit Narayan Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Prabhash Kumar, CGC --- 4/10.01.2013 Mr. S. N. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of Annexure no. 15 dated 04.02.2012, petitioner shall move fresh representation before the respondent no. 1 within two weeks from today. Learned counsel for the Union of India submits that if such a representation is moved, an appropriate decision shall be taken thereon in accordance with law preferably within 30 days thereafter and decision so taken shall be communicated to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that present petition be disposed of in the light of the statements made by t...
Shailendra Kumar Singh Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
IN THE HIGH Court OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C). No. 1705 of 2008 Shailendra Kumar Singh Petitioner Versus Union of India & Ors. Respondents ---------- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Petitioner : Mr. Nikesh Kumar Sinha For the Respondents : ----------- 03/10.01.2013 Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application. Prayer is allowed. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed as withdrawn. (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) A. Mohanty...
Yashawant Sharan and ors Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cont.Case (C ) No.410 of 2009 Yashawant Sharan and others...................Petitioners VERSUS State of Jharkhand and others.........Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR.JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioners : Dr.S.N.Pathak For the State :J.C to Sr.S.C.I 20.10.1.13. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the order passed by this Court has not been complied with as no decision has been taken with respect to reversion of 78 persons, who had illegally been promoted by the State of Bihar and at the same time, the petitioners though have been promoted but they have not been promoted with effect from the date when those 78 persons had been promoted illegally on the higher post. In this context, an order which was recorded on 3.1.2013 would be relevant which is reproduced hereunder: Mr.Verma, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that pursuant to the order passed by this C...
Anil Khirwal Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 686 of 2004 Anil Khirwal Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand Respondent -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA For the Petitioner: Mr. Ananda Sen, Advocate, For the Respondent: Mr. Pankaj Kumar, A.P.P. -------- C.A.V. on 23.11.2012 Pronounced on 10.01.2013 ORDER H.C.Mishra,J.: Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.2. This application is directed against the order dated 30.06.2004 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Sadar at Chaibasa, in G.R. No. 361 of 2003, whereby the application filed by the petitioner under section 239 of the Cr.P.C., for discharge, has been rejected by the Court below, finding that there are sufficient materials on the record for framing charge against the petitioner.3. The petitioner has been made accused in Noamundi P.S. Case No. 36 of 2003, corresponding to G.R. No. 361 of 2003, for the offence under sections 379/ 411 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 21...
Sakra Oraon Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI I.A.No.3299 of 2012 IN Cr. Appeal (D.B.)No. 1069 of 2012 Sakra Oraon. ... ... ... ... ...Appellant -Versus- The State of Jharkhand. ... ... ... ... ...Respondent -------------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.PATEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY -------------- For the Appellant: Mr. Kumar Nilesh, Advocate. For the State: A.P.P. -------------- 04/ Dated 10th January, 2013 Oral order: Per D.N.Patel,J:1. The present application has been preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 105 days in preferring the Criminal Appeal.2. Having heard the learned Counsel for both the sides and looking to the reasons stated in this Interlocutory Application especially in paragraph No.4 there are reasonable reasons for condonation of delay.3. We, therefore, condone the delay and allow this Interlocutory Application.4. Registry is directed to enlist this Cr. Appeal on the board of Admission on 17th January, 2013. [D.N.Patel,J.] [D.N...
Bachchu Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jan-10-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A.No. 3682 of 2012 ----- 1. Bachchu Singh 2. Rameshwar Singh 3. Sudama Devi 4. Mahadeo Singh Petitioners. Versus The State of Jharkhand Opposite Party. . ..... Coram : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar. ----- For the Petitioners : Sri. Yogesh Modi For the State : Sri.S.S.Prasad, A.P.P. ----- 03/10.01.2013. Anticipatory bail application filed by Bachchu Singh, Rameshwar Singh, Sudama Devi and Mahadeo Singh is moved by Sri. Yogesh Modi, learned counsel for the petitioners and opposed by Sri. S.S.Prasad, Addl P.P. for the State. It is alleged that informant gave Rs 1,11,000/- to co- accussed Kedar Singh, who refused to return it. In the subsequent statement, informant stated that aforesaid money given to Kedar Singh in presence of Suresh Singh, Nilkanth Pandey, Ram Prasad Singh, Dilip Singh and Baldeo Prasad Verma. Ram Prasad Singh and Dilip Singh, in their statement stated that informant gave Rs 61,000/- to Kedar Singh whereas Suresh Sing...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »