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.
Lakhi Munda Alias Lakhi Singh Munda Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI. B.A.No. 6785 of 2013 ----- Lakhi Munda @ Lakhi Singh Munda Petitioner. Versus State of Jharkhand Opp.party . ------ Coram : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar. ----- For the Petitioner : Smt. Jashodhara Tripathi For the State : S.C.-II, ----- 03/30.07.2013 Bail petition filed by Lakhi Munda @ Lakhi Singh Munda in connection with S.T.No.462/2011,pending in the court of A.J.C.- XIII,Ranchi, is moved by Smt. Jashodhara Tripathi , learned counsel for the petitioner and opposed by Standing Counsel No-II. It is submitted by learned Standing Counsel not II that in the court below next date is fixed on 14.08.2013 and the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi instructed him that he will produce all the witnesses within two months from 14.8.2013. Under the said circumstance, I direct the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi to complete evidence in the present case by October, 2013. Since, earlier bail prayer of the petitioner rejected, I am not ...
Md AlimuddIn Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 984 of 2013 Md. Alimuddin @ Alimuddin ... ... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Others.. ... ... Opposite Parties --- CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY For the Petitioner : Mr. Amit Sinha, Advocate For the State : A. P. P. I.A. No. 5150 o06. 26.07.2013 Petitioner has filed this limitation application for condoning the delay of 1523 days in filing the restoration application for bearing Cr.M.P. No. 984 of 2013. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has no information regarding the dismissal of the aforesaid Cr. Revision No. 331 of 2007 and the said Revision application has been dismissed for default due to non-compliance of the part of the order dated 19.12.2008. As the sufficient cause has been shown by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the delay in filing in the instant Cr.M.P. No. 984 of 2013 is condoned. Accordingly, I.A. No. 5150 of 2013 is allowed. Cr.M.P. No. 984 of 2013 As the petitioner h...
Md.Manzoor and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C) No. 2884 of 2011 Md. Manzoor & another ....Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand & others Respondents -------- Coram: THE HONBLE MR JUSTICE P.P. BHATT -------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Birendra Burman, Advocate For the Respondents : JC to GP-II & Mr. A.K. Das, Advocate (IA No. 3707 of 2013) /30.7.2013: Present interlocutory application has been filed by the petitioners inter alia praying that the respondent No.4 may be restrained from making construction over the landed property, which is the subject matter of the instant writ petition as well as Misc. Case No. 01/10 (arising out of Execution Case No. 15/2009). Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as respondents and perused the application as well as other materials placed on record. According to the learned counsel for the respondents, petitioners filed a collusive partition suit and obtained decree and therefore, at the stage of execution, the present respondents ...
Pondey Jonko Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 447 of 2013 Pondey Jonko Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand Respondent --------- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. PATEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR --------- For the Appellant : Mr. R.P. Gupta, Advocate For the State : Mr. A.P.P. --------- 04/Dated :30. July, 2013 th Per D.N. Patel, J.:1. This criminal Appeal is Admitted.2. Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that original accused no. 2 (Sessions Trial No. 13 of 2008) namely, Krishna Mundaiya has already filed criminal appeal being criminal appeal no. 987 of 2012 in which record and proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 13 of 2008 has been called for from the Trial Court and the same has been received by this Court, therefore, this appeal may be heard along with Criminal Appeal No. 987 of 2012.3. In view of the submission, this criminal appeal will be heard along with criminal appeal no. 987 of 2012 and also record and proceedings of Sessions Trial no. 13 ...
Bedani Devi Vs. Collectariate
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(PIL) No. 2007 of 2013 Bedani Devi ...... Petitioner Vrs. The State of Jharkhand and others ...... Respondents ------ CORAM: HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. B.K. Dubey, Adv. For the Respondents: J.C. to A.G. Dated 30th July, 2013. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner wants to withdraw this writ petition. In view of the above, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn for which the respondents have no objection. (Prakash Tatia,C.J.) (Jaya Roy, J.) Sudhir...
Sanjay Nandi Vs. Police
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(PIL)No.3651of2013 SanjayNandi .... .... .... Petitioner Versus StateofJharkhand&Ors. .... .... ....Respondents CORAM :HON'BLETHECHIEFJUSTICE HON'BLEMRS.JUSTICEJAYAROY ForthePetitioner :Mr.ManishKumar,Advocate FortheRespondents :Mr.R.R.Mishra,G.P.II th OrderNo.04 Dated,30 July,2013 The name of Mr. R.R. Mishra, G.P.II be shown as counselfortherespondentStateinthecauselist. Learnedcounselfortherespondentssubmittedthathe isinprocessoffilingoftheaffidavitandaccordingtohimasperhis instruction there are number of excess roads for the colony and thereisnoplantocloseanyoftheexcessroad. Weareoftheconsideredopinionthatiftherespondents are constructing wall and wants to keep the way in addition to approachroadtheninthatsituationthatshouldnotbelessthan15 feetwide. However, this order is subject to modification after considering reply affidavit which is sought to be filed by the respondents and if there are other excess points available with adequatewidth,thent...
Shabana Parveen Alias Sabana Parveen Vs. the State of Jharkhand and An ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M. P. No. 1857 of 2012 ----- Shabana Parveen @ Sabana .. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Md. Rizwan Ahmad .. Opp. Parties ----- CORAM : HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE JAYA ROY ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Jai Shankar Tripathy , Advocate. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Binay Kumar Pathak, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. ------- C.A.V.ON 22.07.2013 PRONOUNCED ON: ../07/2013 ----- Jaya Roy, J Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the Opposite party no.2 and the State counsel.2. This case has a very chequired history which I am going to nearate in short that the opposite party no.2 Md. Rizwan Ahmad filed an application under section 438 and 440 of the Cr.P.C. for his anticipatory bail in connection with the complanant Case No. 71 of 2011 registered under Section 498A of the I.P.C. against the present opposite party no.2 namely Md. Rizwan Ahmad, in which the petitioner of present Cr.M.P. namely Sababna Parveen w...
Pramod Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI B.A.No.5698of2013 PramodYadav Petitioner Versus TheStateofJharkhand OppositeParty CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.UPADHYAY ForthePetitioner :Mr.PankajKr.Dubey,Advocate FortheState :A.P .P. 02/30.07.2013 Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. It reveals that the informant received call on his mobile from mobile No.9835632725andthecallerdemandedRs.30,000/asrangdaridisclosinghis identityasmemberofM.C.C.Duringinvestigationcomplicityofthispetitioner hascomeinlightandhehasbeenremandedinthiscase. It is submitted that accused Dineshwar Yadav has confessed his guilt disclosingnameofthispetitionerandsaidDineshwarYadavhasbeengranted bailbythisCourtvideB.A.No.2175of2013. LearnedcounselappearingfortheStateopposedtheprayerforbail. Consideringtheperiodofdetentioncoupledwiththefactthatcoaccused DineshwarYadavhasbeengrantedbail,abovenamedpetitionerisdirectedto be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand)withtwosuretiesofthelikeamounteachtothesat...
Veena Devi Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.S. No. 219 of 2010 Veena Devi ..Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Ors. .Respondents ----- Coram:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Respondents : J.C. to G.P. III --- I.A. No. 4730 o14. 30-07-2013 In this I.A., the petitioner has prayed for fixing an early date of hearing of W.P.S. No. 219 of 2010. It has been submitted that petitioner is a lady and the matter is pending since 2010. The matter is regarding her appointment. The petitioner has been facing hardship. The writ petition requires to be heard at an early date. Learned J.C. to G.P. III 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. 219 of 2010 under the heading "For Admission" on 24th September, 2013. ( Narendra Nath Tiwari, J) Rakesh/...
Ram Shankar Chourasia Vs. Radeshyam Chourasia and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(C)No. 4218 of 2012 Ram Shankar Chourasia .... .. Petitioner Versus Radheshyam Chourasia & Ors. ...... Respondents --- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE P.P.BHATT For the Petitioner : Mrs. Sarita Gupta, Adv. For the Respondents : M/s Ashish Verma, Kumari Rashmi, S.Narsaria Adv. - -- 5/30.07.2013 The instant writ petition has been filed being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order dated 29.04.2013 passed by the learned District Judge-I, Dumka in Title Suit (Probate) No.01 of 2003 whereby the prayer of the transposed plaintiff No.2 for admitting his pliant filed on 08-06-2012 and for de-novo trial of the case has been rejected. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as respondents and perused the impugned order as well as other material placed on record. On perusal of the same, it appears that the defendant no.2 in the original plaint has been transposed as plaintiff no.2 by order dt.31-05-2012 on the ground that he is supporting the ca...
- ‹ Prev
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- Next ›
- Last »