Jharkhand Court July 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.
Md Manjur Khan Vs. Chief Secretory
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(PIL) No. 543 of 2013 Md. Manjur Khan ... ... ... Petitioner. Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Ors... ... ... Respondents ------ CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH ---- For the Petitioner: Mr A.K. Mahto. For the Respondents: J.C to AAG Order No. 06 ------ Dated 19th July, 2013 In this petition, counter affidavit has been filed by the State complaining therein that the Deputy Commissioner, Garhwa is not responding to the official letter dated 15th March, 2013 and 6th April, 2013. In view of above, the Deputy Commissioner, Garhwa is directed to remain present in the Court on 14 th August, 2013. Put up this case on 14th August, 2013. (Prakash Tatia, C J) (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J) Alankar/-...
Trilochan Sharma Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI. W.P(C) No.511of 2013 Trilochan Sharma ........................ Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand &Ors .................. Respondent CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.P.BHATT For the Petitioners :- Mr A.K.Sahani Adv. For the State-Respondents :- Mr. Vikash Kishsore Prasad Adv. 2/19.7.2013. The present petitioners by way of filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for quashing of the order dated 11.8.2012 passed by the respondent no.3 in case no. 394 of 2011(Annexure1) declining to entertaining the objection raised by the petitioner under section 87 of the C.N.T Act. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the order dated 11.8.2012 was passed ex-parte without affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner preferred Review application (Annexure-2) but the respondent authority has not taken any decision on his review applicatio...
Raj Kumar Agarwal Vs. Election Commission of India and
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Civil Review No. 33 of 2012 --- Raj Kumar Agarwal --- --- --- --- Petitioner Versus The Election Commission of India through its Principal Secretary, New Delhi & others -- Respondents --- Coram: Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh --- For the Petitioner: Mr. Anil Kr. Sinha, Sr. Advocate and Mr. Pandey Neeraj Rai, Advocate --- Reportable Dated 19th July 2013 --- Heard counsel for the petitioner.2. This Civil Review has been filed to review the judgment dated 5th April 2012 passed by us in W.P.(PIL) No. 1801/12 and W.P.(C) No. 1802/12. By this order, while upholding the decision of the Election Commission of India of cancelling the biennial election of Council of States (Rajya Sabha) of the State of Jharkhand, this Court handed over investigation of one of the cases already registered by the State Police, to the Central Bureau of Investigation. The petitioner is aggrieved against the said judgment though he was not a ...
Puran Mal Agrawal Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
CRIMINAL REVISION NO. 618 OF 200.(Against the order dated 1.8.2008 passed by Sri S. K. Choudhary, learned Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, in G.R. No. 573 of 2007). ------- Puran Mal Agarwal ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------- For the Petitioner : M/s P.D. Agrawal & S.L. Agarwal, Advocates. For the State : Mr. Niki Sinha, A.P.P. -------- PRESENT HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------- By Court:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 1.8.2008 passed by Sri S. K. Choudhary, learned Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, in G.R. No. 573 of 2007 arising out of Mango P.S. Case No. 72 of 2007, whereby, the application filed by the petitioner under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C., has been rejected by the Court below.3. The petitioner has been made accused in Mango P.S. Case No. 72 of 2007 corresponding to G.R. No. 573 of 2007 in view of the fact that a raid was conducted at the sh...
Dalan Yadav Alias Dalan Prasad Yadav Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI B.A.No.5015of2013 DalanYadav@DalanPrasadYadav Petitioner Versus TheStateofJharkhand OppositeParty CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.UPADHYAY ForthePetitioner :Mr.V .P.Singh,Sr.Advocate Mrs.RashmiKumari(A.C.) FortheState :A.P .P. 03/19.07.2013 Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. The petitioner is accused in connection with S.T. No.546 of 1986(S) arisingoutofBhandaraP.S.CaseNo.2/1982correspondingtoG.R.CaseNo.11 of 1982, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions JudgeI, Lohardagga. Thisisacaseofmisuseofprivilegeofbail.Itappearsthatthepetitioner was directed to remain physically present on 15.9.1995, 09.01.1996, 29.01.1996and07.02.1996buthedidnotappearinperson. On26.02.1996 bailofthepetitionerwascancelledbecausehewasnotpresentinperson.The processu/s82&83Cr.P.C.wereissuedbutitwasalsoprovedtobeafutile exercise. Not only that, petitioner became so clever that he made another personBharatPandeytosurrenderintheCourtathisplaceandthatgentleman wastakenintocustod...
No.922334258 Ex Constable Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
W.P.(S) No. 7173 of 2005 (An application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) No. 922334258 Ex-Constable Surinder Singh ... Petitioner Versus 1. Union of India through its Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India, New Delhi.2. Director General, Central Industrial Security Force, New Delhi.3. Assistant Inspector General/ IGCISF, Central Industrial Security Force, Patna .. . . .. Respondents For the Petitioner : Mr. Sachin Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Faizur Rahman, CGC, UOI --- PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR By Court: The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the penalty order dated 24.4.1997 and the appellate order dated 15.7.1997.2. The brief facts of the case are that, the petitioner was appointed as constable in the year, 1992. On 26.6.1996 he was granted casual leave for 15 days and he was required to report for duty on 17.07.1996. In the meantime, he felt ill and on 15.7.1996 he informed the authority about his illness...
Akshay Steel Works Pvt Ltd Vs. Union of India Through Its Commissioner ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.T. No. 7008 of 2012 Akshay Steel Works Pvt. Ltd. Petitioner Versus' Union of India & others ........ Respondents ---------- CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Petitioner : M/s Sumeet Kr. Gadodia & A.K.Mahato For the Respondents : Mr. Deepak Roshan ----------- Order No.13 Dated 19th July, 2013 Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioner's application for exemption from the condition of pre-deposit was rejected by the Commissioner, (Appeals), Central Excise and Service Tax, Ranchi. However, the petitioner was permitted to comply with the pre-deposit under Section 35 F of the Central Excise Act. The petitioner's contention is that petitioner reversed the amount of Rs. 21,58,103/- and also has given break up of other tax including cess. Petitioner gave this information along with copy of the Form-RG 23.Part II vide petitioner's letter dated 21.2.2012. According to the petitioner, petitioner was enti...
Bajrangi Prasad Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI B.A.No.4989of2013 BajrangiPrasad@Bajrangi Petitioner Versus TheStateofJharkhand OppositeParty CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.UPADHYAY ForthePetitioner :Mr.SanjayKumar,Advocate FortheState :A.P .P. 04/19.07.2013 Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. ThepetitionerisaccusedinconnectionwithS.T.No.173of2013arising outofTelcoP.S.CaseNo.11of2013correspondingtoG.R.CaseNo.91of2013, pendingintheCourtoflearned3rdAddl.SessionsJudge,Jamshedpur. It reveals from the F.I.R. that two minor girls were abducted by the petitionerandtheywererecoveredfromthehouseoffriendofthisaccused. It is submitted that statement of the victim recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. clearly indicates that they themselves were intending to accompany the petitioner. Furthermore,thepetitionerwasnotarrestedwiththegirlandhe wasnotpresentinthehouseattherelevantpointoftime. LearnedcounselappearingfortheStateopposedtheprayerforbail. Itappearsthattwominorgirlswereabductedbythepetitionerandthere isdirectallegationagainst...
Ramjee Paswan Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
1 W.P. (S) No. 7037 of 2005 [In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India] ............ Ramjee Paswan ... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi 2. The Director General-cum-Inspector General of Police, Ranchi 3. The D.I.G. of Police, J.A.P., Ranchi 4. The Commandant, J.A.P.-3, Govindpur, Dhanbad. ... Respondents. ............. For the Petitioner : Mr. K.K.Singh, Mr. Suresh Kumar, Advocates. For the Respondents : Mr. Saket Upadhyay, J.C. to A.G. Miss Renuka Trivedi, Advocate ............ PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR ------------ By Court The petitioner has approached this Court challenging the order of penalty dated 27.11.1998, the appellate order dated 24.07.2001, the order dated 16.02.2003 passed in the Memorial and the order dated 07.07.2004 passed on the representation preferred by this petitioner, pursuant to order passed by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 11664 of 1999 (P)...
Mahendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-19-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 566 of 2013 Mahendra Yadav ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate & Mr. N.K. Pandey, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. ------ 2/ 19.07.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the Judgment dated 23.4.2013 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro, in Criminal Appeal No. 61 of 2013, whereby the appeal filed against the order dated 2.4.2013 passed by learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Bokaro, in G.R. No. 1262 of 2012, rejecting the bail application of the juvenile-petitioner, has been dismissed by the learned Appellate Court below. The petitioner has been made accused in Petarwar/Tenughat P.S. Case No. 131 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 1262 of 2012, for the offence under Section 376 (2)(g) of the Indian Penal C...
- ‹ Prev
- 97
- 98
- 99
- 100
- 101
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 106
- 107
- Next ›
- Last »