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.
Mukesh Mittal Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-17-2013
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P.No.2252 of 2012 Mukesh Mittal ..................................................Petitioner VERSUS State of Jharkhand and another.............Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioner : Mr. Arvind Kumar For the O.P.No.2 :Mr. Ananda Sen 7/ 17.6.13. As prayed for on behalf of opposite party no.2, let this matter be listed on 24.6.2013. Till then, interim order passed on 18.4.2013 shall continue. (R.R. Prasad, J.) ND/...
Karun Kumar Das and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-17-2013
IN THE HIGHCOURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. A.B.A.No. 859 of 2013 ----- 1. Karun Kumar Das 2. Ahilya Devi Petitioners. Versus State of Jharkhand Opp.party ------ Coram : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar. ----- For the Petitioners : Sri R. K. Singh For the State : Smt. Sadhana Kumar, A.P.P., Sudhansu Kr. Deo ----- 04/17.06.2013. Anticipatory bail petition filed by Karun Kumar Das and Ahilya Devi in connection with Mohanpur P.S. Case no. 392/2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 1514/2012, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Deoghar, is moved by Sri R.K. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and opposed by Smt. Sadhana Kumar, A.P.P. for the State and Sudhansu Kumar Deo, Advocate. It is alleged that the petitioners along with others put fire in the house of informant. The aforesaid facts find support from the statement of other witnesses recorded by the I.O. as well as physical finding of the I.O. Under the said circumstances, I am not inclined to enlarge the petition...
Mukesh Kumar Mangeskar Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-17-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4122 of 2012 Mukesh Kumar Mangeskar Petitioner -V e r s u s- State of Jharkhand & Another ... Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR. For the Petitioner : - Mr. Sanjeev Thakur, Advocate For the State : - Mr. S.K. Dubey, A.P.P. For the O.P. No. 2 : - Mr. Sanjay Kr. Dwivedi, Advocate. 02/17.06.2013 Put up this case after two weeks, as prayed by learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. In the meantime, interim order dated 26.02.2013 shall continue. ( Prashant Kumar, J.) sunil/...
Santosh Pandey Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-17-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3886 of 2013 Santosh Pandey ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioner :Mr. A. K. Kashyap (Sr. Advocate) For the State :A. P.P. ----- 4/17.6.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Section 386, 387, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471/34/120B of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Sakchi P.S. Case No. 64 of 2013 corresponding to G.R. No. 605 of 2013. From the F.I.R., which was lodged on the basis of the written information of a Police Officer, it appears that the police was informed that Akhilesh Singh and Jasbir Singh, who were in jail, were involved in extortion of levy from the businessmen and the contractors, through their associates including the petitioner. The petitioner was apprehended by the police and from possession of the petitioner some mobile phones and cash ...
Ramchandra Sahu and Another Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-17-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI Cr.Appeal(DB)No.661of2012 With Cr.Appeal(DB)No.756of2012 1.RamchandraSahu 2.AmardeepSahu Appellants(InCr.AppealNo.661/12) PrakashSahu@PrakashSahuSaoAppellant(InCr.AppealNo.756/12) Versus TheStateofJharkhand Respondent(Inbothcases) CORAM: HON'BLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL HON'BLEMR.JUSTICESHREECHANDRASHEKHAR FortheAppellants :Mr.M.K.Habib,Advocate(InCr.Appeal661/12) FortheAppellant :Mr.P .P.N.Roy,Sr.Advocate(InCr.Appeal756/12) FortheRespondent:A.P .P. 20/Dated:17 th June,2013 PerD.N.Patel,J.: Cr.Appeal(DB)No.661of2012 1. Supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of appellant no. 2 tenderinghisunconditionalapologyoffilingofaforgeddocumenti.e.School Leaving Certificate of appellant no.2. The said document was forged and fabricatedanditwascontendedthatappellantno.2isminorandI.A.No.1226 of2013whichisfiledonbehalfofappellantno.2isnowtobewithdrawn.This affidavitistakenonrecord.2. Accordingly,I.A.No.1226of2013isdisposedofaswithdrawn.3. Thisappealhasbeenadmitte...
Rinku Prasad Yadav Vs. Human Resource Development
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-17-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 6572 of 2012 Rinku Prasad Yadav & Others .. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand & Others .. Respondents ----- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI ----- For the Petitioners - Mr. Ranjit Kumar For the Respondents - M/s A.Allam (Sr. Adv.), Saurav Arun ----- 10/17.6.2013 In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a direction on the respondents to pay the petitioners' remuneration. According to the petitioners, they were duly appointed as Para teachers in different schools in Jamtara District. They joined their respective schools in the year 2007. Since thereafter they have been continuously working in their respective schools. But remuneration has not been paid to them in spite of their repeated requests and representations. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Jharkhand Eduction Project Council has not controverted the said contentions. It has been submitted that the Director, Jharkhand Education Proj...
Mansoor Ansari Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-17-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI CriminalAppeal(DB)No.80of2013 MansoorAnsari ... Appellant Versus TheStateofJharkhand ... ... ... Respondent CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL HONBLEMR.JUSTICESHREECHANDRASHEKHAR FortheAppellant :M/sNileshKumar,VijayantVerma FortheState :Mr.R.Mukhopadhyay,S.C.II Mr.S.Srivastava,A.P.P. th 10/Dated:17 June,2013 PerD.N.Patel,J.1. Inthiscriminalappeal,thejudgmentofconvictionandorder ofsentencepassedbyPrincipalDistrict&SessionsJudge,Lohardaga inS.T.No.163of2006isunderchallenged.2. Wehave passed order dated 13th June, 2013mainly forthe reason that neither the investigating officer nor the doctor, who carried out the postmortem on the body of the deceased, was examinedasprosecutionwitness,thoughtheywerementionedas prosecutionwitnessinthechargesheet.3. We had, therefore, given adirection tothe Secretary, Home DepartmentoftheStateofJharkhandtofileanaffidavitastowhy thesewitnessesweredropped.Today,adetailedaffidavithasbeen filedand it has been submittedbythe Secre...
Manish Dubey Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-17-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B.A. No. 1917 of 2013 with A.B.A. No. 2070 of 2013 Hitesh Das .........Petitioner( in ABA 1917/13) Manish Dubey......Petitioner ( in ABA 2070/13) Vs. The State of Jharkhand ........Opposite parties ( in both cases) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioners: Mr. Jitendra S. Singh ( in ABA 1917/13) Mr. K.K. Mishra ( in ABA 2070/13) For the State: Mr. A.K. Pandey, APP ( in ABA 1917/13) Mr. Moti Gope, APP ( in ABA 2070/13) 3/17.06.2013: Both the anticipatory bail applications are heard together as they arose from the same FIR. Anticipatory bail applications filed by petitioners Hitesh Das and Manish Dubey in connection with Jamtara P.S. Case No. 146 of 2012 ( G.R. No. 333 of 2012) pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamtara are moved by Sri Jitendra S. Singh and Sri K.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners respectively and opposed by Sri. A.K. Pandey and Sri Moti Gope, learned Additional P.Ps. In...
Shakti Pada Kumbhakar and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-17-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A.No. 793 of 2013. ----- 1. Shakti Pada Kumbhakar 2. Smt. Musuri Devi Petitioners. Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Smt. Karuna Devi Opposite Party. ..... Coram : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar. ----- For the Petitioners : Sri M.B. Lal For the State : Sri V.K. Tiwary, A.P.P. ----- 04/17.06.2013. Anticipatory bail application filed by Sahkti Pada Kumbhakar and Smt. Musuri Devi is moved by Sri M.B. Lal, learned counsel for the petitioners and opposed by Sri V.K. Tiwary, Addl.P.P. for the State. This is a case under Section 498/34 of the I.P.C. Petitioners are father-in-law and mother-in-law of complainant. No specific allegations made against these petitioners. Considering the aforesaid fact and circumstance, I allow this application and direct the petitioners, named above, to surrender in the court below by 27.06.2013. If petitioners surrender by that time, the court below is directed to enlarge the petitioners, named above, on bai...
Ashok Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jun-17-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 866 of 2013 Ashok Singh .... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mr. Ram Prakash Singh For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 17.06.2013 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 Manika PS case No. 58 of 2012 pending in the court of SDJM, Latehar. It reveals from FIR that the husband of the informant was insisted by the petitioner to get operated because he was suffering with Appendix. At the insistence of the present petitioner, the deceased went for operation and the petitioner was also present and assisting at the time of operation. Due to negligence committed by the doctor, large intestine of the deceased got punctured; as a result, infection developed and he died. It is submitted that the petitioner has nothing to do wit...
- ‹ Prev
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- Next ›
- Last »