Jharkhand Court March 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.
Sunil Kumar Chourasia Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI L.P.A.No.241of2012 SunilKumarChourasia ......Appellant Versus TheStateofJharkhandandors. ......Respondents CORAM:HONBLETHECHIEFJUSTICE HONBLEMRSJUSTICEJAYAROY .... FortheAppellant:Mr.PrashantPallav,Adv. FortheState :JCtoA.G. Dated6 th March,2013 ByCourt Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties.2. Admittedly,thepetitionercouldgettheExplosiveslicenceonly becauseofthereasonthathewasalesseeforoneminesallottedto him.Admittedly,theleaseperiodalreadyexpiredandpetitioneris pursuinghisremedyforrenewalofthemininglease.3. Whenthereisnominingleaseinexistencethenthereisno reasonforclaiminganyexplosivelicencebythepetitioner.Inthat viewofthematter,thelearnedSingleJudgerightlydismissedthe writpetition.However,itissubmittedbythelearnedcounselforthe petitioner that the petitioner's application for renewal is pending withtheCommissioner(Mines),Jharkhand,Ranchi.4. If the said application is pending before the Commissioner (Mines), Ranchi then said application may be decided by th...
Krishna Santhalia and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M.P. No. 374 o1. Krishna Santhalia 2. Mahesh Santhalia . Petitioners Versus 1. State of Jharkhand 2. S. Ahmad Opp. Parties ----- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Ananda Sen, Advocate For the State : APP ----- 02/06.03.2013: Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the State. This application has been filed for quashing of the order dated 16.03.2012 and also orders dated 30.08.2012 and 11.12.2012, whereby and whereunder, processes under Sections 82 & 83 Cr. P.C. were ordered to be issued against the petitioners respectively. Mr. Ananda Sen, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners, in a case registered under Sections 420 and 387 of the Indian Penal Code, were granted bail. However, when the charge sheet was submitted, cognizance of the offence was taken and the matter was posted for framing of charge. Thereupon, an application for d...
Patit Pawan Kapat Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 1213 of 2013 Palit Pawan Kapat ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. ------ 2/ 06.03.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution. The petitioner has been made accused for the offences under Sections 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 4/21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development Regulation) Act and Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act, in connection with Bahragora P.S. Case No. 105 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 661 of 2012. The petitioner is alleged to be involved in illegal transaction of Panna stones. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner, Palit Pawan Kapat, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand), with two...
Pushpa Choudhary and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M.P. No. 1857 o1. Pushpa Choudhary 2. Amitabh Choudhary..Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand and another Opp. parties ----- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD ----- For the Petitioner : Mr Dilip Jerath, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. B.M.Tripathy, Sr. Advocate ----- 8/06.03.2013 This application has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No.1103 of 2011 including the order dated 21.11.2012, whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 406/34 of Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioners. Before adverting to the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, the case of the complainant needs to be taken notice of. It is the case of the complainant opposite party no.2 that she had married petitioner no.2, Amitabh Choudhary in the year 2005. At the time of marriage, jewelries, household articles as well as cash were give...
Manoj Kumar Roy Vs. Chief of Administration, B.S.T
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 4733 of 2006 Manoj Kumar Roy ... ... ... ... .. Petitioner Versus Chief of Administration, Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Patna, Bihar and others .. ... Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH ............ For the Petitioner : None For the Respondents : J.C. to S.C.-III ........ 6/06.03.2013 No one appears on behalf of petitioner. Counsel for the respondents BSRTC submits by making reference to the statement made in paragraph No. 7 that details of the amount paid to the petitioner, as also the amount due to him have been indicated thereunder which are quoted hereinunder :- 1. C.P.F. - Rs. 91,002.00 Paid vide cheque no. 142276 dated 04.11.03.2. 75% Gratuity - Rs. 40,095.00 3. 25% Gratuity - Rs. 13, 593.00 Paid vide Cheque no. 118959 dated 08.04.2005.4. U/L - Rs. 33, 485.00 Amount yet to be paid 5. Dues of Salary - Rs. 17,667.95 6. Difference of Vth Rs. 5395.00 Pay Commission - 7. Interim Relief - Rs. 1429.00 8....
Jharkhand Against Corruption Through Its President Durga Oraon Alias M ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2013
1 INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P(PIL)No.89of2013 JharkhandAgainstCorruptionVs.TheStateofJharkhand&Ors. CORAM: HON'BLETHECHIEFJUSTICE HON'BLEMRS.JUSTICEJAYAROY FortheAppellant/Petitioner:Mr.RajeevKuma FortheRespondentState:JCtoAG FortheRespondentC.B.I:Md.M.Khan, OrderNo.6 Dated6 th March,2013 Supplementarystatusreportshavebeenshownbythelearned counselforC.B.Itous,whichwehaveperused.However,wearenot satisfiedwiththespeedoftheprogressinthematterandsoisthe positioninspiteofthefactthatwealreadyrefusedtograntalong timeoftwomonthsforfurtherstepstobetakenbytheC.B.Iasback ason22ndJanuary,2013. Be that as it may, we are returning the original reports to learnedcounselforC.B.Iforsafetypurposesandwehopethatthe C.B.Iwillproceedexpeditiously. Learnedcounselforthepetitionervehementlysubmittedthat intheallegationofkidnappingofoneofthewitnessesinthecaseof Horse Trading in Rajya Sabha Election, 2012, investigation is not proceedingandtheaccusedisnotbeingarrested.Itisalsosubmitted thataccusedisanM...
Sandip Kumar Mahato and anr Vs. Human Resource Development
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.956 of 2013 Sandip Kumar Mahato & Anr. . Petitioners Versus State of Jharkhand & Ors. ...Respondents Coram : The Honble Mr. Justice Narendra Nath Tiwari For the Petitioners : Mr. Manoj Tandon, Advocate For the Respondents : J.C. to G.P.II ----- 2/06.03.2013 In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the Memo nos. 4154 and 4165 dated 22.12.2012, whereby they have been transferred contrary to the provisions of Jharkhand State Nationalized Primary School Teachers (Transfer and Disciplinary Proceeding) Rules,1994. It has been stated that there is specific rule prohibiting transfer of school teacher from his home block without considering his convenience. By the impugned orders, the said rule has been violated and the petitioners have been transferred to Schools in other blocks. The transfer orders being violative of the provisions of the said rule are illegal. The petitioners protested against the said orders by filin...
Smt Alpana Kumari Vs. the State of Jharkhand and Others
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI L.P.A.No.375of2012 Smt.AlpanaKumari ......Appellant Versus TheStateofJharkhandandors. .....Respondents CORAM:HONBLETHECHIEFJUSTICE HONBLEMRSJUSTICEJAYAROY .... FortheAppellant:Mr.SanjayKumarDwivedi,Adv. FortheState :Mr.VikashKishorePrasad,Adv. Dated6 th March,2013 ByCourt Heardlearnedcounselfortheappellant.2. Theappellant'scontentionisthatappellantwasallotedplot no.1byBikramadityaSahkariGrihNirmanSocietyLtd.asbackasin theyear1988andthesaidallotmentofplotwasillegallycancelled bytheSocietyintheyear,1990.3. The petitionerappellant availed the remedy in different forums,includingtheConsumerRedressalForum,andthatmatter wentuptotheSupremeCourtandpetitioneralsoapproachedthis Court by filing writ petition etc. . However, ultimately relief was granted to the petitioner by National Consumer Commission of refundofthemoneyandpetitionerchallengedtheorderofNational ConsumerCommissionintheSupremeCourt,whereinthepetitioner wasgivenpermissionto availotherremedy.Thereaf...
Dr. Amreshwar Prasad Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.4994 of 2011 Dr. Amreshwar Prasad ... Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand & Ors. ....... Respondents. ------ CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI ------ For the petitioner : Mr. S.N. Prasad, Advocate For the State : J.C. to A.G. For the JPSC : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Amitabh & K.K. Sinha, Advocates. ------ 7/06.03.2013: This writ petition shall be heard. Since the respondents have appeared and filed counter affidavit, no notice needs to be issued. In view of the fact that punishment of dismissal has been awarded to the petitioner, he is given liberty to mention this case before appropriate Bench for fixing an early date of hearing. (Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.) Shamim/...
Sunil Kumar Mandal and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Mar-06-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 405 o1. Sunil Kumar Mandal 2. Smt Parma Devi .... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mrs. M. Patra For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 06.03.2013 Counsel for the petitioners is permitted to make necessary correction in para 1 of the application. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail filed by the petitioners in connection with Harla PS case No. 136 of 2012 for the offence registered under sections 498/341/342/323/324/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioners have been prosecuted for causing torture and treating the informant with cruelty for want of more dowry demanded in terms of an Alto car. It is submitted that the informant was not willing to marry, but under compulsion made by the police, marriage was solemnized. Since husband was not satisfied with the marriage, he filed a suit for divorce within ten days after marriage. It is al...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »