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.
Dasru Manjhi Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI I.A.No.4587of2013 in CriminalAppeal(DB)No.473of2013 DasruManjhi Appellant Versus TheStateofJharkhand Respondent CORAM:HON'BLEMR.JUSTICED.N.PATEL :HON'BLEMR.JUSTICESHREECHANDRASHEKHAR FortheAppellant :Mr.LukeshKumar,Advocate FortheRespondent :A.P.P. th 3/Dated:25 July2013 PerD.N.Patel,J.I. A.No.4587of2013: ThisapplicationhasbeenpreferredunderSection5ofthe LimitationActforcondonationofdelayof1552daysinpreferring thiscriminalappeal. Having heard the learned counsel for both the sides and lookingtothefactsandreasonsstatedinthisI.A.especially,in paragraph nos. 5, 6 & 7, there are reasonable reasons for condonationofdelay. We,therefore,condonethedelayinpreferringthecriminal appeal. I.A.No.4587of2013is,therefore,allowedanddisposedof. Cr.Appeal(DB)No.473of2013: Registryisdirectedtoenlistthiscriminalappealontheboard ofAdmissionon30thJuly,2013. (D.N.Patel,J.) (ShreeChandrashekhar,J.) R.Shekhar/AmitCp3...
Punam Rajat Bara Vs. Home Affairs
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(S).No.2887of2013 with I.A.No.3139of2013 PunamRajatBara. .Petitioner. Versus UnionofIndia&Ors. ....Respondents. CORAM:HONBLEMR.JUSTICENARENDRANATHTIWARI ForthePetitioner : Mr.P.K.Mukhopadhyay,Advocate FortheUOI : Mr.AshokSingh,CGC 03/25.07.2013: Whenthewritpetitionistakenup,learnedcounselforthe petitionersubmittedthatthepetitionerwouldhavenogrievance againsthertransfer.But,bytheimpugnedordershehasbeen transferredfromRanchitoNeemuch,inMadhyaPradesh,which has a long distance and three days' journey from Ranchi. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner's husband is postedas Inspector,IncomeTax,Ranchiandhertwochildren are admitted and studying in a school at Ranchi. If transfer is inevitable,shecanbesenttoanyplaceeasilyaccessiblefrom Ranchi. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that instead of filing writ petition, the petitioner should have expressed her difficulties before the competent authority. The Deputy Inspector General of Police ...
Baleshwar Gope Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI B.A.No.5617of2013 BaleshwarGope Petitioner Versus TheStateofJharkhand OppositeParty CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.UPADHYAY ForthePetitioner :Ms.RenuBala,Advocate FortheState :A.P .P. 02/25.07.2013 Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. ItisallegedinthewrittenreportthatSitaKumari,minordaughterof informant,wasabductedbythepetitionerwithanintentiontomarry. ItissubmittedthatvictimSitaKumarhasbeenexaminedu/s164Cr.P.C. inwhichshehasclearlystatedthatsheishavingloveaffairwiththepetitioner andshelefthomeoutofhersweetwill. Theygotthemselvesmarriedata templeatPatnaandnowshewantstolivewithpetitioner.Sincetheboyisof othercaste,hermotherisnotacceptingthemarriage. LearnedcounselappearingfortheStateopposedtheprayerforbail. Consideringthefactsandcircumstancesaswellasstatementofvictim, abovenamedpetitionerisdirectedto bereleasedonbailonfurnishingbail bond of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amounteachtothesatisfactionoftheCourtoflearnedC.J.M.,Hazari...
Manish Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No.564 of 2013 Manish Singh ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioner : Mr. Yogesh Modi For the State : A. P.P. ----- 2/25.7.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.2. Petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 3.6.2013 passed by Smt. Archana Kumari, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi, in G.R. Case No.753 of 2013, arising out of Bundu P.S. Case No.17 of 2013, whereby the application filed for release of the car seized in connection with the case, has been rejected by the Court below.3. Petitioner has been made accused in Bundu P.S. Case No.17 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No.753 of 2013 for the offence under Sections 304B / 120B of the IPC, wherein there is allegation against the petitioner and the other co-accused persons to have subjected the deceased to cruelty and torture for demand of dowry and to have...
Manoj Pathak and ors Vs. Union of India Thruugh C.B.i.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P. No.715 of 2011 Manoj Pathak and others........................Petitioners VERSUS Union of India through C.B.I............Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioner :Mr. Rupesh Singh For the Union of India: Mr.M.Khan 4/ 25.07.13 Having heard it does appear that sufficient ground appears to be there on account of which the petitioner could not appear on the date, i.e. 25.11.2010 when Cr.M.P.No.636 of 2008 got dismissed on account of its non- prosecution. Accordingly, this application is allowed and Cr.M.P.No.636 of 2008 is restored to its original file. Let Cr.M.P.No.636 of 2008 be listed under the heading for orders on 1.8.2013 so that the matter be disposed of finally. ( R.R. Prasad, J.) ND/...
Santosh Kumar Vs. Railways
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.S. No. 3780 of 2012 Santosh Kumar ..Petitioner Versus The Union of India & Ors. .Respondents ----- Coram:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI For the Petitioner : Mr. Onkar Nath Tiwari, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Rishikesh Giri, Advocate ---- I.A. No. 2574/2013 06/25-07-2013 Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I find no ground made out for fixing an early date of hearing of the writ petition in precedence over older cases and the cases of the same age. I.A. No. 2574/2013 is, accordingly, rejected. ( Narendra Nath Tiwari, J) Rakesh/...
Shiva Munda Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5571 of 2013 Shiva Munda .........Petitioner Vs. The State of Jharkhand ........Opposite party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mr. Nilesh Kumar For the State: Mr. S.S. Choudhary , APP 3/25.07.2013: It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody from last five years and the case is pending only for examination of I.O. In spite of repeated reminder, I.O. is not appearing, thus petitioner may be enlarged on bail. Learned Additional P.P. submits that on 01.08.2013, the case is fixed for evidence. He submits that on that date, I.O. will be examined. Under the said circumstance, put up this case for admission on 06.08.2013. ( Prashant Kumar,J.) Sharda/-...
Birendra Kumar Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.249 of 2012 Birendra Kumar ... ... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Ors. Opp. Parties ----- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. V.K. Trivedi, Advocate For the State : J.C. to S.C.III ----- 11/25.07.2013: Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the order passed by this Court has been complied with and to this effect, show cause has been filed. In view of the submission made on behalf of the State, the proceeding of contempt is dropped. (R.R. Prasad, J.) Ravi/-...
Upasna Arya Alias Upasna Devi Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1726 of 2013 Vimala Devi Petitioner -V e r s u s- The State of Jharkhand ... Oppsite Party WITH A.B.A. No. 2436 of 2013 Upasna Arya @ Upasna Devi Petitioner -V e r s u s- The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party WITH A.B.A. No. 2515 of 2013 Vikash Kumar Arya Petitioner -V e r s u s- The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR. For the Petitioners : - Mr. Ramawatar Sharma, Advocate For the State : - Mr. Arun Kr. Pandey, A.P.P. For the Informant : - Mr. Deepak Kr. Prasad, Advocate. 05/25.07.2013 All the three anticipatory bail applications arose from the same first information report, thus, are heard together and disposed of by this order. Heard Sri Ramawatar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Arun Kumar Pandey, learned Additional P.P. for the State and Sri Deepak Kumar Prasad, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that pe...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kamkap India
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-25-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI C.M.PNo.365of2012 TheCommissionerofIncomeTax,Jamshedpur Vs. Kamkap(India) CORAM: HON'BLETHECHIEFJUSTICE HON'BLEMRS.JUSTICEJAYAROY FortheAppellant/Petitioner:Mr.D.Roshan FortheRespondents: Dated25 July,2013 th Delaycondoned. T.ANo.4/2006wasdismissedduetononremovalofthedefectsand therefore, it was dismissed without notice to the respondent. However, Civil Miscellaneous Petition was filed for restoration of T.A No.4/2006. SinceitwasamatterbetweentheCourtandtheappellantandtheappeal wasnotevenproperlyconstitutedbecauseofseveraldefects,thereisno needtoissuenoticetotherespondent. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner on the application for restorationofT.ANo.4/2006. 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.365/2012isallowedandT.ANo...
- ‹ Prev
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- Next ›
- Last »