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.
Arun Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-19-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 5876 of 2009 --- Arun Kumar --- --- ---- Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand through the Deputy Commissioner, Garhwa& others --- --- --- Respondents --- CORAM: The Honble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh For the Petitioner: Mr. Ananda Sen, Advocate For the State: Mr. Jay Shankar Tiwary, JC to SC-1 --- I.A. No. 3700 /2013 02/ 19.06.2013 The instant interlocutory application has been preferred for fixing an early date of hearing. The petitioner has approached this Court in the present writ application for directing the respondents to declare him a displaced person and grant displaced certificate with all consequential benefits.2. From the averments made in the writ application and statements of the petitioner, it appears that it is the case of the petitioner that under Kutuk Jalasya Yojna, his land falling under Khata No. 1, Khesra No. 897 of village-Bhagdari, P.S.-Bhandariya, District- Palamau, was acquired sometime in the year 1...
Tulsi Singha 744270028 Insp E Now Ac Exe and ors Vs. State of Jharkhan ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-19-2013
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P.No.1043 of 2013 Tulsi Singha and others.Petitioners VERSUS State of Jharkhand .............. Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioners : Mr. S.N.Prasad 4/ 19.6.13. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw this application. Permission is accorded. Let this application be dismissed as withdrawn. (R.R. Prasad, J.) ND/...
Ramod Kumar Singh and ors Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-19-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M. P. No. 881 o1. Ramod Kumar Singh 2.Maheshwar Mahto 3.Jateshwar Mishra 4.Jaishree Banra 5.Mahadeo Prasad Yadav Petitioners Versus State of Jharkhand and another Opp. Parties ----- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD ----- For the Petitioners : Mrs. Vandana Singh, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. ----- 5/19.06.2013 Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw this application with a liberty to raise all the points, which have been raised in this application relating to innocence of the petitioners, at the appropriate stage. Reserving the said liberty, this application is permitted to be withdrawn. (R.R. Prasad, J.) AKT...
Kaushal Kishore Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-19-2013
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P.No.2340 of 2012 Kaushal kishore Singh ...........................Petitioner VERSUS State of Jharkhand and others.... ....Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioner : Mr.M.K.Roy For the State : A.P.P 7.19.6.13. As prayed for on behalf of the petitioner, let this matter be listed after two weeks. Till then, interim order passed on 18.12.2012 shall continue. ( R.R.Prasad, J.) ND/...
Shafique Ansari 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.1322 of 2013 Shafique Ansari ........................................Petitioner VERSUS State of Jharkhand and another......... .Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioner : Mr.Sanjay Prasad For the State : A.P.P 3.19.6.13. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The petitioner, vide order dated 9.11.2011 was granted anticipatory bail whereby the petitioner was directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount on his surrender. The petitioner did not surrender within time as stipulated under order dated 9.11.2011. However, subsequently, an application was filed for extension of time stipulated under order dated 9.11.2011 for surrender of the petitioner. The time was extended. In spite of that, the petitioner did not surrender within the time as stipulated under subsequent order. Again this application has been filed for extension of time stip...
Ramashray Rajwar and ors Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-19-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI I.A.No.1925of2013 In Cr.Appeal(DB)No.255of2007 1.RamashrayRajwar 2.NareshRajwar 3.RajendraRajwar Appellants Versus TheStateofJharkhand Respondent CORAM: HON'BLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL HON'BLEMR.JUSTICESHREECHANDRASHEKHAR FortheAppellants : Mr.A.K.Kashyap,Sr.Advocate FortheRespondent : Mr.ShekharSinha,A.P .P. 09/Dated:19 th June,2013 PerD.N.Patel,J.:1. Presentinterlocutoryapplicationhasbeenpreferredbyappellantno.3, namely,RajendraRajwar(originalaccusedno.2intheSessionsTrial)under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of sentence awardedtohimbythetrialcourt.Thisappellanthasbeensentencedforlife imprisonment mainly for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the IndianPenalCodeandhehasalsobeenpunishedunderotherSectionsofthe IndianPenalCode.2. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the evidences on record, there is prima facie case against appellant no.3. Previouslyalso,I.A.No.776of2011waspreferredforsuspension...
Sobram Gope Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-19-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.S. No. 5979 of 2011 Sobram Gope ..Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Ors. ..Respondents ----- Coram:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI For the Petitioner : Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad Sinha, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Ajit Kumar, AAG ---- I.A. No. 2975/2013 06/19-06-2013 In this I.A., the petitioner has payed for fixing an early date of hearing of W.P.(S) No. 5979 of 2011 under the heading For Admission. It has been submitted that the petitioner is a retired person and the writ petition relates to retiral dues and other service terminal benefits besides other grievances. Since the petitioner is a retired person, the writ petition deserves early hearing. Learned AAG, appearing on behalf of the respondents, has no objection in fixing an early date of hearing of the writ petition. Considering the grounds mentioned in the application, this I.A. is allowed. Office is directed to list W.P.S. No. 5979 of 2011 under the heading "For...
Gomia Bibi Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-19-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI I.A. No. 1359 of 2013 In Criminal Appeal (D.B) No. 159 of 2013 Gomia Bibi ... ... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... Respondent ------- CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. PATEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR ------- For the Appellant : Mr. Shree Nivas Roy, Advocate For the Respondent : A.P.P 08/DATED 19 h June, 2013 Per D.N. Patel, J.1. This application has been preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay of 228 days in preferring the criminal appeal.2. Having heard the learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and reasons stated in this I.A especially, in paragraph nos. 6 and 7, there are reasonable reasons for condonation of delay. We, therefore, condone the delay in preferring the criminal appeal.3. I.A No. 1359 of 2013 is, therefore, allowed.4. Registry is directed to enlist the criminal appeal on the board of Admission on 24th June, 2013. (D.N. Patel, J.) (Shree Chandrashek...
Manish Kumar Singh and anr Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-19-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI A.B.A.No.1517of2013 1.ManishKumarSingh@ManishKumar [email protected] Petitioners Versus TheStateofJharkhand OppositeParty CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.UPADHYAY ForthePetitioners :Mr.SanjeevThakur,Advocate FortheState :A.P .P. 02/19.06.2013 Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. PetitionersareaccusedinconnectionwithB.S.CitycaseNo.408of2012, pendingintheCourtoflearnedChiefJudicialMagistrate,Bokaro. Itrevealsfromthewrittenreportthattheinformantwastakentoaplace situated within Baledih area where the petitioners and their associates were sittingfrombefore.Theinformantwaskeptconfinedandhewasassaultedby theaccusedpersonspresentoverthere. Theyhadalsocompelledhimtoput signatureoncertainpapers. AsumofRs.20,000/wasalsotakenawayfrom him. It is submitted that the petitioners have no concern with the alleged occurrence. Thedisputeisprevailingbetweentheinformantandcoaccused LalitKumarSinghagainsttransactionofloanamount. LearnedcounselappearingfortheStateopposedth...
Amit Kumar Shah and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-19-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI Cr.M.P.No.543of2012 1.AmitKumarShah 2.SubhashChandraShah Petitioners Versus StateofJharkhand&Anr. Opp.Parties Coram:TheHonbleMr.JusticeR.R.Prasad Forthepetitioner :Mr.V.Shivnath,Sr.Advocate FortheState :Mr.A.P.P. ORDER C.A.V.On12/06/2013 Deliveredon19/06/2013 8/19.06.2013 One Krishna Prasad Singh, Food Inspector, Ranchi, took samples of Krishna Spray Dried Skimmed Milk Powder and Krishna MarkaGheefromtheshopofM/sShahTraders,UpperBazar,Ranchi on25/04/2008andsentitforitsanalysisbeforethePublicAnalyst. Uponitsanalysis,areportwassubmittedtotheeffectthatthesample ofKrishnaSprayDriedSkimmedMilkPowderismisbrandedinterms of the provision as contained in Section 2 (ix) (j) and (k) of the PreventionofFoodAdulterationAct,asBatchnumber,Lotnumberand DateofManufacturewasnotthereoverthepacketofthemilkpowder. ItwasreportedthatitisincontraventionofRule32(e)and(f)ofthe PreventionofFoodAdulterationRules,1955.Thereupon,whensanction forprosecutionwasaccordedbythecompetenta...
- ‹ Prev
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- Next ›
- Last »