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-25-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6785 of 2013 Lakhi Munda @ Lakhi Singh Munda.........Petitioner Vs. The State of Jharkhand ........Opposite party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mrs. Jashodhara Tripathy For the State: Mrs. Lily Sahay, APP 2/25.07.2013: It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody from 21.5.2011 and charge framed in this case on 08.02.2012 but up till now, no witness produced by the prosecution. Under the said circumstances, learned Additional P.P. is directed to seek instruction from the Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi regarding the time by which all the witnesses will be examined by the prosecution. Pu up this case in the next week. ( Prashant Kumar,J.) Sharda/-...
Pawan Kumar Poddar Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P. No.490 of 2011 With Cr.M.P.No.769 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.777 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.247 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.221 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.150 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.156 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.195 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.780 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.850 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.852 of2008 with Cr.M.P.No.860 of 2008 with Cr.M.P.No.868 of 2008 Pawan Kumar Poddar and others......Petitioners VERSUS State of Jharkhand and others. ......Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioners : M/s. Nitin Pasari, D.K.Pathak,Advocate For the State : A.P.P For the J.S.E.B : M/s. A.K.Kashyap, Sr. Advocate and M.K.Sinha, Advocate For the D.V.C :M/s. R.N.Sahay & P.Singh, Advocate 34/ 25.7.13. Mr.R.N.Sahay, learned counsel appearing for the D.V.C submits that he earnestly needs some time to workout on some point involved in this case and therefore, the matter be posted on 8.8.2013. As prayed for, let this matter be listed on 8.8.2013. Til...
Ramesh Yadav and ors Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2385 o1. Ramesh Yadav 2. Ramchandra Yadav 3. Jagdish Yadav .... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mr. Ramlakhan Yadav For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 25.07.2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State. This is an application for anticipatory bail flied by the petitioners in connection with Jainagar PS case No. 168 of 2012 for the offence registered under sections 341/323/353/385/504/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It reveals from FIR that the petitioners caused assault to the informant and demanded rangdari and he was not allowed to teach students and in this way, they have caused hindrance to the informant in discharging his official duties. It is submitted that the informant who is para teacher is not Govt servant and therefore offence under section 353 IPC is not made out. Rest of the sections are...
Sunil Raj Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6797 of 2013 Sunil Rai ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioner : Mr. Kumar Nilesh For the State : A. P.P. ----- 2/25.7.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Govindpur (Barbadda) P.S. Case No.05 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No.46 of 2012. The case relates to theft of a motorcycle. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner Sunil Rai is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Abhisekh Kumar, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad, or his successor, in connection with Govindpur (Barbadda) P.S. Case No.05 o...
Smt.Sangita Jha Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI Cont.Case(Cvl)No.862of2011 Smt.SangitaJha................... Petitioner Versus StateofJharkhand&Anr Opp.Parties Coram: HonbleMr.JusticeR.R.Prasad ForthePetitioner :Mr.SunilKUmar,Advocate FortheO.P. :JCtoSr.SCI FortheIntervenor :Mr.A.K.Sahani,Advocate I.A.No.5012of2013 13/25.07.2013 Mr.Sahani,learnedcounselappearingfortheintervenorsubmits that while executing the order passed by this Court even connection for operatingcableT.V.ofsomeofthelicensees,fourinnumbers,havebeen disconnectedasaresultofwhichtheyarenotabletooperatetheircable T.V.,thoughtheyarepossessingvalidlicensesforoperatingcableT.V.and, therefore,theprayerhasbeenmadetodirectthecompetentauthorityfor allowingthelicenseestooperatecableT.V. However, Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitionersubmitsthatthelicenses,uponwhichclaimisbeinglaid,seemto haveexpired. Thedispute,whichhasbeenraised,neednottobedecidedby thisCourt,ratheritistobedecidedbythecompetentauthority. Inthatviewofthe...
Ms Ajanta Bottlers and Blenders Pvt Ltd Through Its Director Shri Prem ...
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
W.P.(T) No. 7499 of 2012 --- In the matter of an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. ---- M/s Ajanta Bottlers & Blenders Pvt. Ltd --- --- --- --- Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand through the Secretary- cum-Commissioner, Department of Excise and Prohibition, Jharkhand, Ranchi & others -- -- -- Respondents --- For the Petitioner: Mr. Satyabir Bharti & Mr.Prabhat Kr. Sinha, Advocates For the State: Mr. Ajit Kumar, AAG & Mr. Vikash Kumar, JC to AAG --- Present Hon'ble the Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh --- JUDGEMENT Reportable --- Reserved on:12. 06.2013 Pronounced on:25. 07/2013 ---- Aparesh Kumar Singh, J: This writ petition has been preferred with a prayer to declare the Rule 106 (tha) of the Rules framed by the Board of Revenue contained in the notification dated 10th November 2012 in exercise of powers conferred under section 90 of the Jharkhand Excise Act, 1915 as ultra vires being beyond the rule making power of the Board of Rev...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ms Arc Horn Global System Pvt Ltd
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI C.M.PNo.363of2012 TheCommissionerofIncomeTax,Jamshedpur Vs. M/s.ArcHornGlobalSystem(P)Ltd. CORAM: HON'BLETHECHIEFJUSTICE HON'BLEMRS.JUSTICEJAYAROY FortheAppellant/Petitioner:Mr.D.Roshan FortheRespondents: Dated25 July,2013 th Delaycondoned. T.ANo.39/2006wasdismissedduetononremovalofthedefects andtherefore,itwasdismissedwithoutnoticetotherespondent.However, CivilMiscellaneousPetitionwasfiledforrestorationofT.ANo.39/2006. SinceitwasamatterbetweentheCourtandtheappellantandtheappeal wasnotevenproperlyconstitutedbecauseofseveraldefects,thereisno needtoissuenoticetotherespondent. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner on the application for restorationofT.ANo.39/2006. Inviewofthe reasonsstated inthe orderdated12 th September, 2012, passed in C.M.P No.460/2011 (Commissioner of Income Tax, CentralRevenueBuilding,PatnaVs.Md.Sayeed,Ranchi)andinviewof thefactthatinthepresentpetitionalso,thefactsaresimilartothatof C.M.PNo.460/2011,C.M.PNo.363/2012isallowedandT.A...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sri Santosh Pandey
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI C.M.PNo.356of2012 TheCommissionerofIncomeTax,Jamshedpur Vs. SriSantoshPandey CORAM: HON'BLETHECHIEFJUSTICE HON'BLEMRS.JUSTICEJAYAROY FortheAppellant/Petitioner:Mr.D.Roshan FortheRespondents: Dated25 July,2013 th Delaycondoned. T.ANo.05/2007wasdismissedduetononremovalofthedefects andtherefore,itwasdismissedwithoutnoticetotherespondent.However, CivilMiscellaneousPetitionwas filedforrestorationofT.ANo.05/2007. SinceitwasamatterbetweentheCourtandtheappellantandtheappeal wasnotevenproperlyconstitutedbecauseofseveraldefects,thereisno needtoissuenoticetotherespondent. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner on the application for restorationofT.ANo.05/2007. In view of the reasons stated in the order dated 12 th September, 2012, passed in C.M.P No.460/2011 (Commissioner of Income Tax, CentralRevenueBuilding,PatnaVs.Md.Sayeed,Ranchi)andinviewof thefactthatinthepresentpetitionalso,thefactsaresimilartothatof C.M.PNo.460/2011,C.M.PNo.356/2012isallowedandT.ANo.05/...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ms Hitech Chemicals Pvt Ltd
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI C.M.PNo.357of2012 TheCommissionerofIncomeTax,Jamshedpur Vs. M/s.HitechChemicalsPvt.Ltd. CORAM: HON'BLETHECHIEFJUSTICE HON'BLEMRS.JUSTICEJAYAROY FortheAppellant/Petitioner:Mr.D.Roshan FortheRespondents: Dated25 July,2013 th Delaycondoned. T.ANo.07/2005wasdismissedduetononremovalofthedefects andtherefore,itwasdismissedwithoutnoticetotherespondent.However, CivilMiscellaneousPetitionwasfiledforrestorationofT.ANo.07/2005. SinceitwasamatterbetweentheCourtandtheappellantandtheappeal wasnotevenproperlyconstitutedbecauseofseveraldefects,thereisno needtoissuenoticetotherespondent. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner on the application for restorationofT.ANo.07/2005. Inviewofthe reasonsstated inthe orderdated12 th September, 2012, passed in C.M.P No.460/2011 (Commissioner of Income Tax, CentralRevenueBuilding,PatnaVs.Md.Sayeed,Ranchi)andinviewof thefactthatinthepresentpetitionalso,thefactsaresimilartothatof C.M.PNo.460/2011,C.M.PNo.357/2012isallowedandT.ANo....
Nakul Mandal Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Rev. No. 465 of 2013 ------- Nakul Mandal . Petitioner -Versus- 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Mrs. Namita Mandal ..... Opposite Parties ------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : : M/s. Durga C. Mishra For the Opposite Parties : : M/s. A.P.P. ------- 02/ 25.07.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 26.04.2013 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dumka, in Cr. Misc. petition No. 45 of 2011, whereby the petitioner has been directed to make the payment of Rs.4,000/- per month as maintenance to his deserted wife.3. The impugned order shows that the application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., was filed by the opposite party No. 2, Namita Mandal, claiming herself to be the legally wedded wife of the petitioner and also stating that she was being subjected to cruelty and torture for demand of dowry. It is also s...
- ‹ Prev
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- Next ›
- Last »