Jharkhand Court April 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.
Kiramat Mian Alias Karamat Mian and anr Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI A. B. A. No. 27 o1. Kiramat Mian @ Karamat Mian 2. Taiba Khatoon .. ... ... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR ............ For the Petitioners : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad For the State : Mr. S.S Choudhary, A.P.P. ........ 4/15.04.2013 Anticipatory bail application filed by petitioners Kiramat Mian @ Karamat Mian and Taiba Khatoon in connection with Chandwara P.S. Case No. 63 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No. 743 of 2012 pending in the court of C.J.M. Koderma, is moved by Sri Nawal Kishore Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioners and opposed by Sri S.S. Choudhary, learned Additional PP. for the State. It appears from paragraph No. 27 of the supplementary case diary that charge-sheet submitted against petitioners showing them absconder. Under the said circumstance, I am not inclined to enlarge petitioners above named on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, their anticipatory bail appli...
Rajesh Mahto Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4283 of 2012 Rajesh Mahto ... Petitioner -V e r s u s- The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR. For the Petitioner : - Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : - Mr. S.K. Dubey, A.P .P. 05/15.04.2013 Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this anticipatory bail application. Permission accorded. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn. ( Prashant Kumar, J.) sunil/...
Amit Kumar Sinha Vs. Shri Hemant Soren the Honble Dy Chief Minister Cu ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C). No.7106 of 2012 Amit Kumar Sinha ..... Petitioner Versus Shri Hemant Soren, the Hon'ble Dy. Chief Minister cum Minister of Mines & others ........ Respondents ---------- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Petitioner : Mr. K.K.Ojha For the Respondents : J.C. to A.G. I.A. No. 1305 o05. 15.04.2013 By way of instant interlocutory application, petitioner seeks to add the Directorate of Mines, Department of Mines & Geology as well as Additional Director of Mines, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Jharkhand as party- respondents in the instant case as they were inadvertently left out at the time of filing of writ application. Learned counsel for the petitioner also undertakes to delete the name of respondent no.1 as it is not material for determination of the case any longer. In any case the State of Jharkhand is already a party in the writ application, where the petitioner seeks issuance of prospective license ...
The Management of Ms Motors Limited Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (L) No. 4867 of 2012 --- The Management of M/s Motors Ltd (Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company Ltd) Now Tata Motors Ltd. --- --- ---- Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & others --- --- --- Respondents --- CORAM: The Honble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh For the Petitioner:Mr. Sashi Anugraha Narain, Sr. Advocate, Mr. V.P. Singh, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Arun Kr. Singh & A.K. Das Advocates For the State: Mr. Ajit Kumar, AAG, Mr. Rajesh Kr., GP-V & Mr. Dhananjay Kr. Pathak, Advocate --- I.A. No. 451/2013 08/ 15.04.2013 According to the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, the prayer made in the instant I.A. has been rendered infructuous on account of the fact that the notification dated 17th September 1998 has been brought on record now by the respondent no. 2 himself. Accordingly, I.A. No. 451/13 stands dismissed as infructuous. I.A. No. 1940/2013 The instant I.A. has been preferred for stay of the impugned Award during the pendency ...
Sudhir Kumar Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B.A. No. 1279 of 2013 Sudhir Kumar Singh .........Petitioner Vs. The State of Jharkhand ........Opposite party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mr. Kishore Kumar Singh For the State: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP 2/15.04.2013: Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this anticipatory bail application. Permission accorded. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn. ( Prashant Kumar,J.) Sharda/-...
Dr Md Sharifur Rahman Vs. Finance
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.5650 of 2012 Dr. Md. Sharifur Rahman & Ors. .......... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand & Ors. .......... Respondents ------ CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI ------ For the petitioners : Mr. Sujit Narayan Pd., Advocate For the State : J.C. to A.A.G. ------ 6/15.04.2013: This writ petition shall be heard. Since the respondents have appeared, no notice needs to be issued. Shamim/ (Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.)...
Amitabh Kumar Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B.A. No. 2657 of 2012 Amitabh Kumar .........Petitioner Vs. The State of Jharkhand ........Opposite party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mr. Anil Kumar For the State: Mr. S.S. Sahay, APP 9/15.04.2013: It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that this case has become infructuous as petitioner has already been arrested. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed as infructuous. ( Prashant Kumar,J.) Sharda/-...
Subodh Kumar Singh and anr Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 866 o1. Subodh Kumar Singh 2.Niranjan Singh ....... ... ... ................Petitioners -V e r s u s - The State of Jharkhand ......... ........ ... ... Opposite Party CORAM: - HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate. For the State: : APP. 02/15.04.2013 I am not satisfied with the grounds mentioned in this Cr.M.P. Accordingly, this Cr.M.P. stands dismissed. Petitioner is at liberty to file fresh Anticipatory Bail Application, if he feels. He can collect the certified copy as well as the FIR and the enquiry report after substituting the same by filing xerox copy of the same. (D. N. Upadhyay, J.) Amitesh/-...
Abdul Haque Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.10379 of 2012 Abdul Haque ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioner : Mr. Md. Ashrafuzzaman Khan For the State : A. P.P. ----- 7/15.4.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 17/18/21/22 of the N.D.P.S. Act, in connection with Tati Jharia P.S. Case No.21 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No.3396 of 2012. There is direct allegation that from this petitioner and other co-accused 1 KG 48.Gms of 'charas' was recovered. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner Abdul Haque on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail stands dismissed. (H. C. Mishra, J) R.Kumar...
Anita Gorai Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M.P. No. 39 of 2013 Anita Gorai . Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand Anr. Opp. Parties ----- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : APP ----- 02/15.04.2013: Having heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State , I do not find any illegality with the order dated 08.07.2011 whereby and whereunder the complaint filed by the petitioner was dismissed and at the same time, the order passed by the revisional court also does not suffers from any illegality. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. (R.R. Prasad, J.) Ravi/...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »