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.
Anjan Bandhopadhyay Alias Anjan Bandhopadhyay Vs. the State of Jharkha ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI A.B.A.No.1351of2013 with A.B.A.No.1372of2013 1.AnjanBandopadhyay@AnjanBandyopadhyay....................Petitioner (inA.B.A.No.1351of2013) 1.MaheshwarKumar 2.KrishnaArjunPrasadSingh........Petitioners(inA.B.A.No.1372of2013) Versus TheStateofJharkhand OppositeParty CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.UPADHYAY ForthePetitioners :Mr.BharatKumar,Advocate FortheState :A.P .P. 04/18.06.2013 Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. It reveals from the F.I.R. that after receiving instruction from the S.P., Dhanbad the premises of nonbanking company, running within the district, were inspected by the informant who happens to be a police officer. These petitioners relate to M/s Roofers Capital Management Ltd., Govindpur. It is allegedthatthecompanyhadbeenalluringthepeopletodoinvestmentand they would get higher rate of interest and in this manner they have been misleadingandcheatingthepeopleforthepurposeofraisingfund. ItissubmittedthatpetitionerAnjanBandopadhyayisManagingDirector...
Raju Bhuiyan Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 1918 of 2013 Raju Bhuiyan @ Raju Kumar Bhuiyan ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Chaturvedi, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. ------ 7/ 18.06.2013 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 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Patratu (Bhadani Nagar) P.S. Case No. 208 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 4077 of 2012. The case relates to murder of husband of the informant and there is direct allegation against the petitioner to have knocked the window of the informant calling her husband, whereupon, the husband of the informant came out of the house and there was talk between the deceased and the petitioner, which was also objected to by the informant. Subsequently, four persons came inside the h...
Bindal Ram Alias Binda Ram Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1409 of 2013 Bindal Ram @ Binda Ram Petitioner -V e r s u s- The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR. For the Petitioner : - Mrs. Jashodhara Tripathy, Advocate For the State : - Mr. Prem Prakash, A.P.P. 03/18.06.2013 Anticipatory bail application filed by Bindal Ram @ Binda Ram, is moved by Smt Jashodhara Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioner and opposed by Sri Prem Prakash, learned Additional P.P. for the State. From perusal of paragraph nos. 36, 3739. & 40 of the case dairy, it appears that informant is a lady easy virtue and after death of her first husband, she used to cohabit with different persons. It also appears from Annexure-2, affidavit sworn by brother of informant, that she later on married with one Dilip Bhuiyan and residing with him. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I allow the anticipatory bail application and direct petitioner to surrender in the court...
Amardeep Kachhap and anr Vs. Human Resources Department
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No.3150 of 2013 with I.A. no.3544 o1. Amardeep Kachhap . Petitioners 2.Purushottam kachhap Versus State of Jharkhand & Ors. ...Respondents Coram : The Honble Mr. Justice Narendra Nath Tiwari For the Petitioners : Mr. Amit Kr.Tiwari, Advocate For the Respondents : J.C. to S.C.III ----- 2/18.06.2013 In I.A. no.3544 of 2013, the petitioners have prayed for disposal of W.P.(S) NO.3150 of 2013 in terms of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(S) no.2194 of 2013{Ravindra Kumar Ojha & Ors. Vrs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.}. Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submitted that the case is exactly identical with the case, which has been decided in the aforesaid writ petition and the instant writ petition can be disposed of in terms of the order passed by this Court in the aforesaid cases. Learned J.C. to S.C.III, appearing on behalf of the respondents, has also accepted the said position and submitted that the writ petition itsel...
Saurabh Alias Pinku Alias Saurabh Vs. the State of Jharkhand Through C ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 2688 of 2013 Sourabh @ Pinku @ Saurabh ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand through CBI .. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Chandrajit Mukherjee, Advocate For the CBI : Mr. Md. Mokhtar Khan, S.C. (CBI) ------ 7/ 18.06.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Prosecution. The petitioner has been made accused for the offences under Sections 420, 379, 411, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 43(a)(i) read with Section 66 of the Income Tax Act, 2000, in connection with R.C. No. 221/2011/E/0002/New Delhi. The case was instituted on the basis of the information furnished by the State Bank of India, ADB Muzaffarpur Branch, informing that through RTGS, Rs. 12.50 crores was withdrawn from an account of the State Bank through two RTGS transactions. Rupees twelve crores was credited into the account of one M/s Maharani Automobiles ma...
Orchid Mutual Benefit Limited Reprr by Its Directors Rajiv Singh Kumar ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C). No.1962 of 2013 Orchid Mutual Benefit Ltd. & others .... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand & another ..... Respondents ---------- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Petitioner :Mr. Mahesh Tiwary, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Anil Kr. Sinha, Sr. Advocate, Mr. M.M. Khan, ASGI, J.C. to A.A.G. & Mr. Pandey Neeraj Rai 07/18.06.2013 Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of S.E.B.I submits that affidavit on behalf of S.E.B.I has been filed on 26.4.2013. However, the same is not on record even today. Further, learned counsel for the R.B.I. also submits that counter affidavit on their behalf has been filed only yesterday and copies of which has been served upon the counsel for the petitioner. In that view of the matter, let both the counter affidavits be traced and placed on record on the next date. List this case on 28th June, 2013. In the meantime, it would be open for the petitioner to respond to the coun...
Suman Kumar Alias Vickky Yadav Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI A. B. A. No. 1660 of 2013 Suman Kumar @ Vickky Yadav ... ... ... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... ... ... Opp. Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR ............ For the Petitioner : Mr. B.M. Tripathy, Sr. Advocate Mr. Ram Lakhan Yadav For the State : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, A.P.P. ........ 2/18.06.2013 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...
Raj Kumar Agrawal Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation Ahd Cell Ranchi
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P.No.1264 of 2013 Raj Kumar AgrawalPetitioner VERSUS Central Bureau of Investigation. Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Sr. Advocate For the C.B.I : Mr. M. Khan, Advocate 5/ 18.6.13. When huge amount of Rs.2,14,88,000/- was seized from a vehicle bearing registration no.JH-05-AC-2185, Deputy Director (Investigation), Income Tax Department, Ranchi informed about it to the Officer-in-Charge of Namkum Police Station for taking necessary action. Upon it, a case was registered as Namkum P.S. case no.58 of 2012 under Sections 171(F)/188 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against Sudhanshu Tripathy, representative of Shah Sponge Limited and others. Meanwhile, Public Interest Litigation bearing W.P (PIL) No.1801 of 2012 and W.P.(PIL) No.1802 of 2012 was filed before this Court highlighting malpractices being adopted by the candidates for the election of Rajya Sabha. This Court h...
Rinku Barua Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 2546 of 2013 Rinku Barua ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. R.S. Majumdar, Sr. Advocate & Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. ------ 6/ 18.06.2013 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 406, 420 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Nirsa P.S. Case No. 204 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 3056 of 2012. The petitioner along with her husband and other persons have been made accused in this case on the ground that husband of the petitioner is the Managing Director and rest of the accused persons including the petitioner are the Directors of the Finance Company and they had induced several persons to make deposit in the Company on the pretext of giving high returns, but the deposits made b...
Teju Bedia and ors Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.C. No. 1230 of 2012 --- Teju Bedia & Ors. ..... Petitioners Versus The Union of India & Ors. ...... Respondents --- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE P.P.BHATT For the Petitioners : M/s Ayush Aditya, D. Sen, Adv. For the respondents : M/s Md. M. Khan, Anoop Kr. Sinha, Adv. - -- 5/18.06.2013 Learned counsel for the petitioners states that he has already served copy to the private respondents. Learned counsel for the State as well as National Highway are present. Put up this case after two weeks, so as to enable the learned counsel appearing for the respondents to file counter affidavit, if any. In the mean time, status quo with regard to payment/disbursement of awarded amount in pursuant to L.A. Case No.01 of 2010-11 shall be maintained. (P.P. Bhatt, J.) Saket/-...
- ‹ Prev
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- Next ›
- Last »