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.
Subhash Burman Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B.A. No. 1311 of 2013 Subhash Burman .........Petitioner Vs. The State of Jharkhand ........Opposite party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mr. Chandrajit Mukherjee For the State: Mr. S.K. Srivastava, APP For the Informant: Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate 7/18.06.2013: It is submitted by Sri A.K. Kashyap, Senior Advocate, appearing for the informant that informant is ready to comply the order dated 16.05.2013 and sign on the divorce papers, purported to be filed under section 13B of the Hindu Marriage, Act. Under the aforesaid circumstances, petitioner as well as informant are directed to remain physically present in the court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur on 27.06.2013 and file joint divorce petition on the same day. Put up this case on 01.07.2013. In the meantime, interim order dated 16.05.2013 shall continue. ( Prashant Kumar,J.) Sharda/-...
Bebi Devi and anr Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B.A. No. 1961 o1. Bebi Devi 2. Nirmala Devi .........Petitioners Vs. The State of Jharkhand ........Opposite party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioners: Mr. Arbind Kumar Choudhary For the State: Mr. Prem Prakash, APP 3/18.06.2013: Anticipatory bail application filed by petitioners Bebi Devi and Nirmala Devi is moved by Sri Arbind Kumar Choudhary and opposed by Sri Prem Prakash, learned Additional P.P. So far petitioner no. 2 is concerned, there is direct allegation that she assaulted informant's mother with Axe. It appears that due to the said assault, informant's mother received injuries on her head which is grievous in nature. Under the said circumstance, I am not inclined to enlarge petitioner no. 2, namely, Nirmala Devi, on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, her anticipatory bail application rejected. So far petitioner no. 1, namely, Bebi Devi is concerned, there is no specific overt act against her. Accordingly, I a...
Rashid Mian and anr Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1333 o1. Rashid Mian @ Rashid Ansari 2. Md Rajan @ Rajan Khan .... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mr. A.K.Chaturvedi For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 18.06.2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State. This is an application for anticipatory bail flied by the petitioners in connection with Herhanj PS case No. 01 of 2011 for the offence registered under sections 379/411/120B of the Indian Penal Code. It reveals that four tractors and three trucks loaded with steam coal extracted through illegal mining have been seized by the police. No document against transportation of coal was produced. On interrogation, indulgence of petitioners and other accused in illegal mining and illegal trade of coal has surfaced. It is submitted that similarly situated co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail vide ABA...
Pintu Deogharia Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B. A. No. 937 of 2012 Pintu Deogharia . Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Another .. Opposite Parties -------- 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. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate ------ 20/ 18.06.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State, as also learned counsel for the complainant opposite party No.2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with C.P. Case No. 569 of 2011 for the alleged offence under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. When the case was taken up on 16.8.2012, this Court was informed by learned counsels for both parties that there was a compromise between the parties, in terms of which, the complainant had agreed to live with the petitioner and the petitioner was also ready to keep his wife along with him. In that view of the matter, ...
Padari Balmuchu Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI CriminalAppeal(DB)No.286of2013 PadariBalmuchu ... Appellant Versus TheStateofJharkhand ... ... ... Respondent CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL HONBLEMR.JUSTICESHREECHANDRASHEKHAR FortheAppellant :Mrs.PriyaShrestha,AmicusCuriae FortheState :Mr.PankajKumar,A.P .P. th 04/Dated:18 June,2013 PerD.N.Patel,J.1. Thiscriminalappealhasalreadybeenadmittedbyorderdated 9thMay,2013andtherecordsandproceedingsofSessionsTrialNo. 95of2008wascalledforfromthetrialcourtsoastoappreciatethe argumentsforsuspensionofsentence.2. ThisappellanthasbeenconvictedbytheAdditionalSessions Judge(F.T.C.V),WestSinghbhumatChaibasainSessionsTrialNo. 95of2008forrigorousimprisonmentforaperiodof10yearsfor theoffencepunishableunderSection304PartIoftheI.P.C. The appellantisinjudicialcustodysince8thFebruary2008.Thus,hehas alreadyundergone5yearsand4monthsofimprisonment.3. This Court has received the records and proceedings of the SessionsTrialNo.95of2008.Wehaveperusedthesameandheard thecounselforb...
Sanjay Oraon Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B.A. No. 1306 of 2013 Sanjay Oraon .........Petitioner Vs. The State of Jharkhand ........Opposite party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mr. Pradeep Kumar Deomani For the State: None 4/18.06.2013: Anticipatory bail application filed by petitioner Sanjay Oraon in connection with Kisko P.S. Case No. 23 of 2009 ( G.R. No. 154 of 2009) pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga is moved by Sri Pradeep Kumar Deomani. No body appears on behalf of State. It is alleged that the petitioner abducted informant's husband. Thereafter informant's husband never returned. On 17.04.2009, the dead body of informant's husband found from the river. It is submitted that the petitioner is Sepoy in Bihar Regiment and he was on duty from 01.01.2009 to 09.09.2009, thus, the question of his presence at the place of occurrence does not arise. There is nothing to show that informant had any personal grudge to falsely imp...
Smt Kanti Sharma Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1366 of 2013 Smt Kanti Sharma .... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mr. Ajay Kr Singh For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 18.06.2013 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 Sadar (Mahila) PS case No. 11 of 2012 for the offence registered under sections 452/379/326/323/341/307/120B/ 504 of the Indian Penal Code. It reveals from FIR that Awadhesh Kumar Verma ( accused no.1 in the complaint) has assaulted his mother causing fracture injury to her. It is alleged that the petitioner was also assisting her husband in the alleged assault. It is submitted that the complainant is brother of accused no. 1 and they are fighting for property for which partition suit is going on between them. Petitioner being lady may be granted a...
Umesh Yadav and anr Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1359 o1. Umesh Yadav 2. Kapil Ravidas .... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mr. Swminath Pd. Rai For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 18.06.2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State. This is an application for anticipatory bail flied by the petitioners in connection with PCR case No. 220 of 2012 for the offence registered under sections 323/504/420 of the Indian Penal Code. It reveals from the complaint that the complainant has purchased a piece of land from Madusudhan Sharma and he has incurred expenses to develop the land. The accused persons forcibly removed the fencing and created another fencing and also constructed a hut on the land in question. It is submitted that these petitioners have purchased land from Madhusudan Sharma in the year 2010, whereas the complainant claims that he purchased the ...
Chamcham Devi Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI A.B.A.No.1498of2013 ChamchamDevi Petitioner Versus TheStateofJharkhand OppositeParty CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.UPADHYAY ForthePetitioner :Mr.R.S.Mazumdar,Sr.Advocate FortheState :A.P .P. 03/18.06.2013 Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. PetitionerisaccusedinconnectionwithDugdaP.S.CaseNo.43of2012, correspondingtoG.R.CaseNo.933of2012,pendingintheCourtoflearned AdditionalChiefJudicialMagistrate,BermoatTenughat. Itrevealsfromthefardbeyanofthedeceasedthatthepetitionerandother accused,whoarenamedintheF.I.R.,pouredsomeinflammableliquidonher bodyandsetheronfire.Incourseoftreatmenttheinformantdied. Itissubmittedthatpetitionerisnotdirectlyrelatedwiththehusbandof deceased.Shehasbeenlivingseparatelywithherfamilymembersandshehas nothingtodowiththedemandofdowryortorturecommittedontheinformant duringherlifetime. LearnedcounselappearingfortheStateopposedtheprayerforbailand submitted that para 27 of the original case diary and para 16 of the supplementary case diary ind...
Gore Chand Chakravorty and anr. Vs. Kalpana Roy Chowdhury
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 4902 o1. Gore Chand Chakravorty 2. Arun Chakravorty ....Petitioners Versus Kalpana Roy Chowdhury Respondent -------- Coram: THE HONBLE MR JUSTICE P.P. BHATT -------- For the Petitioners : M/s. Bhaiya Vishwajeet & Arun Kumar, Advocates For the Respondent : Mr. B.K. Jha, Advocate /18.6.2013: Petitioners, by way of filing the present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, have prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ/ order/ direction for quashing and setting aside the order dated 17.7.2007 passed by 1st Additional Munsif, Dhanbad in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 10/2005, whereby the learned court-below allowed the application filed by the plaintiff/ respondent under Section 15 of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1982 and thereby directed the petitioners/ defendants to deposit the arrears of rent since prior to 36 months of the filing of the suit at the rate of Rs.175/- per month as well as t...
- ‹ Prev
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- Next ›
- Last »