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 Ayub Alam Alias Babloo Alias Yakub Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI A. B. A. No. 1656 of 2013 Md. Ayub Alam @ Babloo @ Yakub ... ... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR ............ For the Petitioner : Mr. Mohit Prakash For the State : Ms. Anita Sinha, A.P.P. ........ 5/29.07.2013 Anticipatory bail application filed by Md. Ayub Alam @ Babloo @ Yakub is moved by Sri Mohit Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner and opposed by Ms. Anita Sinha learned Additional PP. for the State. It is alleged that petitioner received 16 cheques on behalf of beneficiaries of NAREGA scheme and misappropriated the same in league with Block Development Officer, Dumri, Gumla. It appears from Annexure-2 that for the said allegation, petitioner is already facing trial in connection with Dumri P.S. Case No. 45 of 2008. In above case petitioner has been granted regular bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I allow this anticipatory bail application and d...
Smt Rajni Devi Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P.No.1640 of 2012 Rajni Devi ....................................Petitioner VERSUS State of Jharkhand ..................Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioner : None For the State :4. 29.7.13. Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner to press this application. Accordingly, this application is dismissed on account of its non- prosecution. (R.R. Prasad, J.) ND/...
Somyajeet Mallick Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B.A. No. 2143 of 2012 Somyajeet Mallick .........Petitioner Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr ........Opposite parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mr. Indrajit Sinha For the State: Mr. Pankaj Kumar ,APP For the O.P. No. 2: Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh 10/29.07.2013: Anticipatory bail application filed by petitioner Somyajeet Mallick is moved by Sri Indrajit Sinha and opposed by Sri Pankaj Kumar, learned Additional P.P. and Sri Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2. At the out set, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to return the money which he took from the complainant as a consideration for sale of land described in the agreement. Learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 has no objection with regard to the said submission. In view of the aforesaid submission, I direct the petitioner to surrender in the court below by 12.08.2013 and file a bank draft of Rs. 40,000/- in the ...
Babu Chand Murmu Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI B.A.No.3586of2013 BabuChandMurmu Petitioner Versus TheStateofJharkhand OppositeParty CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.UPADHYAY ForthePetitioner :Mr.RajaRaviShekharSingh,Advocate FortheState :A.P .P. 05/29.07.2013 Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. Itrevealsthatafterreceivinginformationthatextremistshaveplanted landminesatHirakMargthepolicepartyproceededtotheplacetoverifythe information.NolandminesplantedatHirakMargweredetectedbutthenon PilpiloNarayanpur road, near the house of Binod Bihari Mahto, land mines plantedbytheextremistshave beendetectedandwiththehelpofexpertit weredefused.Onverificationthepersonsinvolvedinplantinglandmineswere knownandtheyhavebeennamedintheF.I.R.Incourseofinvestigationsome oftheaccusedwereapprehendedandtheyconfessedtheirguiltdisclosingname ofthispetitioner.Inthesupplementarycasediarysomeofthewitnesseshave alsostatednameofpresentpetitionerandthathewasactiveinplantingland minesatsaidplace. Itissubmittedthatpetitionerisinjailcustodysin...
Rajeev Ranjan Vs. the Central Bureau of Investigation
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 3816 of 2013 Rajeev Ranjan ..... Petitioner Versus the Central Bureau of Investigation .. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashish Verma, Advocate For the State : Mr. Md. Mokhtar Khan, S.C. (CBI) -------- 8/ 29.07.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the CBI. The petitioner has been made accused for the offences under Sections 120-B r/w 420, 379 & 411 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 43 (a) (j) r/w Section 66 of the I.T. Act,2000, in connection with R.C. No. 221/2011/E/0002/New Delhi. The F.I.R. was lodged by the State Bank of India, on the basis of which, the CBI case was instituted, in which, it is alleged that Rs. 12 Crores 50 Lakhs were transferred to different Banks through RTGS from State Bank of India. RTGS is electronic transfer of money from one account to another. The FIR shows that the account of the State Bank of Indi...
Rajendra Oraon Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI I.A. No. 4270 of 2013 In Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 438 of 2013 Rajendra Oraon Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... ... Respondent ------ CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. PATEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. CHANDRASHEKHAR ----- For the Appellant: Mr. A.K. Chaturvedi For the Respondent: Mr. Pankaj Kumar, A.P.P. ------ 03/Dated: July, 29, 2013 Per D.N. Patel, J1) This interlocutory application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed by the appellant for condonation of delay of 55 days in preferring the instant appeal.2) Having heard learned counsel and looking to the reasons stated in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of the interlocutory application, there is reasonable reasons for condonation of delay of 55 days in preferring the appeal.3) Accordingly, I.A. No. 4270 of 2013 is allowed and delay in filing the instant appeal is condoned.4) Registry is directed to enlist the matter under the heading 'For Admission' on 5th August, 2013. (D. N. Patel, ...
Karma Alias Karamdeo Karmali and ors Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI Cr.Appeal(DB)No.250of2013 1.Karma@KaramdeoKarmali 2.PaloDevi 3.AmritKarmali .......Appellants Versus TheStateofJharkhand .....Respondent. CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL HONBLEMR.JUSTICESHREECHANDRASHEKHAR. FortheAppellants:Mr.VishalKr.Rai,Advocate FortheState:Mr.ShekharSinha,A.P.P. 04/Dated:29 th July,2013 Oralorder: PerD.N.Patel,J.:1. ThisappealhasbeenAdmittedvideorderdated24 thJune,2013and therecordandproceedingsofSessionsTrialNo.506of1993wascalled fromthetrialcourtsoastoappreciatetheargumentsforsuspensionof sentence.ThisCourthasreceivedtherecordandproceedingsofthetrial courtandwehaveperusedthesame.2. Havingheardcounselforboththesidesandlookingtotheevidences onrecord,itappearsthatthereisaprimafaciecaseinfavourofthese appellants.Asthecriminalappealispending,wearenotmuchanalyzing theevidencesonrecord,but,sufficeittosaythatlookingtothedeposition givenbytheprosecutionwitnessesfromP.W.2toP.W.10,thereisaprima faciecaseinfavouroftheseappellants.3. Wethere...
Rajesh Mandal Alias Budhan Mandal Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 310 of 2013 Rajesh Mandal @ Budhan Mandal Petitioner -V e r s u s- The State of Jharkhand & Another ... Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR. For the Petitioner : - Mr. Ranjan Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : - Mr. G.S. Prasad, A.P.P. For the O.P. No. 2 : - Mr. P.K. Mukhopadhyay, Advocate. 05/29.07.2013 Anticipatory bail application filed by Rajesh Mandal @ Budhan Mandal, is moved by Sri Ranjan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and opposed by Sri G.S. Prasad, learned Additional P.P. for the State and Sri P.K. Mukhopadhyay, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. From perusal of complaint petition, I find that no specific overt act alleged against the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I allow the anticipatory bail application and direct petitioner to surrender in the court below on or before 12.08.2013 and in the event of his surrender, the learned court below is d...
Ramakant Rai and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M.P. No.494 o1. Ramakant Rai 2. Smt. Kalindi Rai @ Kalindi Devi . Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand & Ors. Opp. Parties ----- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate For the State : APP ----- 04/29.07.2013: Having heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and regard being had to the allegation made against the petitioners, I do not find any illegality with order passed by the trial court in C/1 Case No.1087 of 2010, refusing to discharge the petitioners from the accusation for the reason that sufficient materials are there to frame charge against the petitioners which order was affirmed by the revisional court vide order 08.01.2013. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. (R.R. Prasad, J.) Ravi/...
Bero Korah Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-29-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5880 of 2013 Bero Korah .........Petitioner Vs. The State of Jharkhand ........Opposite party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mr. Arup Kumar Dey For the State: Mr. Awanikant Prasad,APP 4/29.07.2013: Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this bail application. Permission accorded. Accordingly, this bail application is dismissed as withdrawn. ( Prashant Kumar,J.) Sharda/-...
- ‹ Prev
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- Next ›
- Last »