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.
Radhey Shyam Dubey Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI Cr.Appeal(DB)No.338of2013 RadheyShyamDubey Appellant Versus TheStateofJharkhand Respondent CORAM: HON'BLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL HON'BLEMR.JUSTICESHREECHANDRASHEKHAR FortheAppellant : Mr.MahadeoThakur,Advocate FortheRespondent : Mr.ShekharSinha,A.P.P. 05/Dated:31 st July,2013 PerD.N.Patel,J.:1. Twoweeks'time,asprayedfor,isgrantedtoremovetheofficedefects, failing which, this appeal shall be deemed to have been dismissed automatically,withthe liberty tofile a freshappealwithproper averments, allegationsandannexures.2. Iftheofficedefectsareremovedwithintwoweeks,thismatterwillbe listedon19thAugust,2013. (D.N.Patel,J.) (ShreeChandrashekhar,J.) Ajay/...
Uma Nath Kol and ors Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B.A. No. 1581 o1. Uma Nath Kol 2.Pandhan Chitrakar 3.Dhiren Chitrakar 4.Manilal Murmu .........Petitioners Vs. The State of Jharkhand ........Opposite party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioners: Mr. kaushik Sarkhel For the State: Mr. Amitabh,APP 6/31.07.2013: Anticipatory bail application filed by petitioners Uma Nath Kol, Pandhan Chitrakar, Dhiren Chitrakar and Manilal Murmu is moved by Sri Kaushik Sarkhel and opposed by Sri Amitabh, learned Additional P.P. From perusal of FIR, I find that petitioner no. 2 had made extra judicial confession that he committed murder of deceased. Under the said circumstance, I am not inclined to enlarge petitioner no. 2, namely, Pandhan Chitrakar, on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of petitioner no. 2, namely, Pandhan Chitrakar, is rejected. So far petitioner nos. 1, 3 and 4, namely, Uma Nath Kol, Dhiren Chitrakar and Manilal Murmu respecti...
Ms Atri Construction Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W. P. (C) No. 6983 of 2012 --- M/s. Atri Construction ...Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand & anr. .....Respondents. --- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH --- For the Petitioner : M/s. Ananda Sen, V.K.Tiwary, Advs. For the Respondents : Mr. Anil Kumar, J.C. to A.G.. 02/31.7.2013 The pleadings are complete in the writ petition. From the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner and upon hearing the parties, it appears that the work which was allotted to the petitioner vide Annexure-2 dated 5th October, 2012 for construction of District Combined Agriculture Building, Sahebganj under NIT issued by the Executive Engineer, Rural Development Special Division, Sahebganj, has been cancelled by an order passed on 1st November, 2012 (Annexure-6) by Deputy Commissioner, Sahebganj. It further appears from Annexure-12 to the amended writ petition dated 29th November, 2012, issued by the Special Secretary, Rural Works Department that t...
Ram Prasad Mehta Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 6912 of 2013 ------- Ram Prasad Mehta . Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioner : : M/s. Prabhat Kr. Sinha For the State : : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Ichak P.S. Case No. 82 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 1578 of 2013, for the offence under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code. From the F.I.R. it appears that the case relates to recovery of one stolen motorcycle from the house of the petitioner. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Ram Prasad Mehta, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Shri Sanjay Kumar Choud...
Sahim Khan Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 5547 of 2013 Sahim Khan ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Another .. Opposite Parties -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : M/s R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate & Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. For the Complainant : Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate -------- 4/ 31.07.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution, as also learned counsel for the complainant-opposite party No.2. The petitioner has been made accused for the offences under Sections 323, 379, 427 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (x) of the S.C./S.T.(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, in connection with P.C.R. Case No. 227 of 2011 corresponding to T.R. No. 612 of 2013. The complaint petition was filed by the complainant, from which, it appears that there is land dispute between the parties due to which the occurrence had taken place, in which, the petitioner and other accused...
Parmeshwar Jha Vs. Water Resources Departement
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.S. No. 3551 of 2013 Parmeshwar Jha ..Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Ors. .Respondents ----- Coram:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Advocate For the Respondents : J.C. to S.C. III --- I.A. No. 4105 o03. 31-07-2013 As prayed for, put up this case on 12.08.2013. Till then, the interim order dated 04.07.2013 shall continue. ( Narendra Nath Tiwari, J) Rakesh/...
Bhim Hembram Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI Cr.Appeal(DB)No.308of2013 BhimHembram Appellant Versus TheStateofJharkhand Respondent CORAM: HON'BLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL HON'BLEMR.JUSTICESHREECHANDRASHEKHAR FortheAppellant : Mr.S.P.Roy,Advocate FortheRespondent : Mr.DilipKumarChakraverty,A.P.P. 05/Dated:31 st July,2013 PerD.N.Patel,J.:1. Twoweeks'time,asprayedfor,isgrantedtoremovetheofficedefects, failing which, this appeal shall be deemed to have been dismissed automatically,withthe liberty tofile a freshappealwithproper averments, allegationsandannexures.2. Iftheofficedefectsareremovedwithintwoweeks,thismatterwillbe listedon19thAugust,2013. (D.N.Patel,J.) (ShreeChandrashekhar,J.) Ajay/...
Vaibhav Kumar Singh Alias Vabhav Kumar Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 6906 of 2013 ------- Vaibhav Kumar Singh @ Vaibhav Kumar . Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioner : : M/s. Vivek Agrawal For the State : : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Doranda (A) P.S. Case No. 222 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 2438 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 461/ 379/ 511/ 427 of the Indian Penal Code. From the F.I.R. it appears that the case relates to attempt of committing theft in A.T.M. of Canara Bank. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Vaibhav Kumar Singh @ Vaibhav Kumar, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to ...
Parmanand Thakur and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(S).No.1134of2011 with I.A.No.5217of2013 ParmanandThakur&Anr. .Petitioners. Versus StateofJharkhand&Ors. ....Respondents. CORAM:HONBLEMR.JUSTICENARENDRANATHTIWARI ForthePetitioners : Mr.S.K.Pandey,Advocate FortheState : J.C.toSr.S.C.I 05/31.07.2013: InI.A.No.5217of2013,thepetitionershavepayedforfixing an early date of hearing of W.P.(S) No.1134 of 2011 under the headingForAdmission. Ithasbeensubmittedthatthepetitioners'caseiscovered by earlier decision of this Court and the writ petition can be disposedofintermsofthesaiddecision. Learned J.C. to Sr. S.C.I, appearing on behalf of the respondents,hasnotdisputedthesaidfactsandsubmittedthat inviewofthenatureofthereliefsoughtfor,thewritpetitionitself canbedisposedofatthisstage. Learnedcounselforthepetitionersagreesforthesame. Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. In the writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashingMemoNo.167dated29thDecember,2004,wherebythe petitioners' salary have been refixed wi...
Fulchand 2 Vs. C C L
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.S. No. 3639 of 2012 Fulchand-2 ..Petitioner Versus M/s C.C.L. & Ors. .Respondents ----- Coram:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Ananda Sen, Advocate --- I.A. No. 4763 o04. 31-07-2013 In this I.A., the petitioner has prayed for disposal of W.P.S. No. 3639 of 2012 in terms of the order dated 25.09.2012 passed in W.P.S. No. 6459 of 2007 ( Manmohan Pandey Vs. CCL & Ors). It has been submitted that petitioner's case is covered by the said order passed in the case of Manmohan Pandey ( Supra). Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the application and submitted that the petitioner's case is not covered by the said order and the same cannot be disposed of in terms of the order passed in the said case. In view of the above, I, therefore, find no ground made out for disposal of W.P.S. No. 3639 of 2012 in the term as prayed for. However, since the writ petition has been...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »