Skip to content

Jharkhand Court June 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.

Jun 20 2013

Jay Prakash Vs. the State of Jharkhand Through the Secretary Hrd and o ...

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Jun-20-2013

INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI L.P.ANo.131of2013 JayPrakashVs.TheStateofJharkhand&Ors. CORAM: HON'BLETHECHIEFJUSTICE HON'BLEMRS.JUSTICEJAYAROY FortheAppellant/Petitioner:M/s.M.Tandon,S.Kumar,K.Rashmi A.K.Pandey FortheRespondents:Mr.R.Kumar,JCtoAG OrderNo.4 Dated20 th June,2013 Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. Admit. Noneedtoissuenoticetotherespondents. We perused the interim orders passed by various Single BenchesannexedwiththisL.P.Aandaftergoingthroughthefactsof thecase,weareoftheconsideredopinionthattheeffectoftheorder of transfer of the petitionerappellant, vide order dated 25th September,2012,isrequiredtobestayedandpositionanteisalso required to be restored and the order, Annexure 8, dated 25 th September, 2012 qua the petitionerappellant is stayed and the appellantmaybetakenbacktothepositionprevailingpriortothe orderdated25thSeptember,2012. (Prakash Tatia, C.J.) (Jaya Roy, J.) dey...


Jun 20 2013

Md Imtiyaz Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Jun-20-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B.A. No. 674 of 2013 with I.A. No. 3854 of 2013 Md. Imtiyaz .........Petitioner Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr ........Opposite parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mr. Mohit Prakash For the State: Mr. M.B. Lal, APP 4/20.06.2013: I.A. No. 3854 of 2013 has been fled for withdrawal of this preset anticipatory bail application. In the facts and circumstances mentioned therein, I.A. No. 3854 of 2013 is allowed and the instant anticipatory bail application is permitted to be withdrawn. ( Prashant Kumar,J.) Sharda/-...


Jun 20 2013

Pawan Kumar Poddar Vs. State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Jun-20-2013

In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P. No.490 of 2011 With Cr.M.P.No.769 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.777 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.247 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.221 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.150 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.156 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.195 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.780 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.850 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.852 of2008 with Cr.M.P.No.860 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.868 of 2008 Pawan Kumar Poddar and others......Petitioners VERSUS State of Jharkhand and others. ......Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioners : M/s. Nitin Pasari, D.K.Pathak,Advocate For the State : A.P.P For the J.S.E.B : M/s. A.K.Kashyap, Sr. Advocate and M.K.Sinha, Advocate For the D.V.C :M/s. R.N.Sahay & P.Singh, Advocate 30/ 20.6.13. As prayed for, let these matters be listed under the same heading on 27.6.2013. Till then, interim order passed in respective cases shall continue. ( R.R. Prasad, J.) ND/...


Jun 20 2013

Krishna Gope Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Jun-20-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI A. B. A. No. 2209 of 2013 Krishna Gope ... ... ... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR ............ For the Petitioner : Mrs. Ritu Kumar For the State : Mr. Amitabh, A.P.P. ........ 2/20.06.2013 After some argument, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application. Permission accorded. This anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn. (Prashant Kumar, J.) Binit...


Jun 19 2013

Alim Ansari Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Jun-19-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1774 of 2013 Alim Ansari .... Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mr. Tarun Kr. Sinha For the Opposite Party : Addl.P.P. 19.06.2013 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 Dumri PS case No. 32/2011 for the offence registered under sections 413/414/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, and section 33 of the Indian Forest Act. It reveals from the written report that three trucks loaded with pora coal were apprehended by the Police. Drivers and the occupants of the vehicles did not produce any valid documents. During verification and interrogation, it was detected that illegal mining of coal was going on and the miscreants have stored coal within the forest area of village Siyari. It further transpired that the petitione...


Jun 19 2013

Savitri Devi ? Savitri Tiwari and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Jun-19-2013

In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P.No.1678 o1. Savitri Devi @ Savitri Tiwari 2.Ramashray Tiwari............................Petitioners VERSUS State of Jharkhand and another ...Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioners : Mr. Manish Kumar For the State :A.P.P 5.19.6.13. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that two interlocutory applications bearing nos.960 of 2012 and 2577 of 2013 have been filed wherein same prayer has been made and therefore, he may not be pressing I.A.No.2577 of 2013. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that before filing of this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a petition filed for discharge has already been disposed of and therefore, the petitioners should have filed revision application against the order whereby prayer for discharge has been rejected but instead of filing such application, this Cr.M.P was filed for quashing of the order taking cognizance...


Jun 19 2013

Sudharshan Mahto Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Jun-19-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1744 of 2013 Sudharshan Mahto .... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mr. Nilesh Kumar For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 19.06.2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. This is an application for anticipatory bail flied by the petitioner in connection with Ramgarh PS case No. 132 of 2011 for the offence registered under sections 147/148/149/307/323/324/341/342/353/332/333/337/338/379 IPC of the Indian Penal Code. It is alleged in the FIR that the accused persons after forming an unlawful assembly created jaam on the road ( NH23) causing hindrance to traffic. When the police party reached and tried to disperse the mob, members in the mob became furious and violent and they pelted stones . It is submitted that it was mob of about five hundred persons and it was not possible to identity this petitioner o...


Jun 19 2013

Bilsi Devi Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Jun-19-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B.A. No. 1757 of 2013 Bilsi Devi .........Petitioner Vs. The State of Jharkhand ........Opposite party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mr. Ramawatar Sharma For the State: Mr. V.K. Tiwary, APP 3/19.06.2013: Anticipatory bail application filed by petitioner Bilsi Devi is moved by Sri Ramawatar Sharma and opposed by Sri V.K. Tiwary, learned Additional P.P. This is a case under sections 498(A), 323, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner is mother-in-law of the informant. From perusal of FIR, I find that there is general and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons including this petitioner. It is submitted that co-accused, namely, Reena Devi and Kanchan Devi have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned court below vide order dated 8.3.2013 in ABP No. 150 of 2013 and co-accused, namely, Vijay Verma and Surendra Verma have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned court below vide order dated ...


Jun 19 2013

Majri Paswan and ors Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Jun-19-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A.No. 2149 of 2013. ----- 1. Majari Devi 2. Binod Paswan 3. Chhotan Paswan 4. Manoj Paswan Petitioners. Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2. Bishwanath Paswan Opposite Party. ..... Coram : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar. ----- For the Petitioners : Sri Arbind Kr. Sinha For the State : Sri Pankaj Kumar, A.P.P. ----- 02/19.06.2013. Anticipatory bail application filed by Majari Devi, Binod Paswan, Chhotan Paswan and Manoj Paswan is moved by Sri Arbind Kr. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners and opposed by Sri Pankaj Kumar, Addl.P.P. for the State. From perusal of First Information Report, I find that there is no allegation against these petitioners that they demanded dowry from deceased and/or from her parents. There is no allegation that they tortured deceased for the said demand. Considering the aforesaid fact and circumstance, I allow this application and direct the petitioners, named above, to surrender in the court below by 29...


Jun 19 2013

Aalam Ansari Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Jun-19-2013

INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI CriminalAppeal(DB)No.85of2013 AalamAnsari ... Appellant Versus TheStateofJharkhand ... ... ... Respondent CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL HONBLEMR.JUSTICESHREECHANDRASHEKHAR FortheAppellant :Mr.P.R.Khatri,Advocate FortheState :Mr.RaviPrakash,A.P.P. th 05/Dated:19 June,2013 PerD.N.Patel,J.1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant (original accused no. 2 of S.T. No. 619 of 2003) as he has been mainlypunishedunderSection304PartIIofI.P.C.for10yearsR.I. andhehasalsobeenpunishedundervariousothersectionsofI.P.C. andallthesentenceshavebeenorderedtoberunconcurrentlyby thelearnedtrialcourt.ThisCourthasadmittedthiscriminalappeal byorderdated14th May,2013andtherecordsandproceedingsof SessionsTrialNo.619of2003wascalledforfromthetrialcourtso astoappreciatetheargumentsforsuspensionofsentence.2. This Court has received the records and proceedings of the Sessions Trial No. 619 of 2003. We have perused the same and heard the counsel for both the sides...


  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial