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.
Ram Awtar Singh Vs. Santosh Kumar Gupta
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI C.R. No. 10 of 2012 Ram Awtar Singh .... .. Petitioner Versus Santosh Kumar Gupta ...... Opp. Party --- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE P.P.BHATT For the Petitioner : M/s. Birendra Kumar, Neeraj Kishore, Adv. For the Opp. Party : Mr. P.R. Bhagat, Adv. - -- 17/31.07.2013 Since, the learned counsel for the opposite party is not present, put up this case in the next week. In the meantime, ad interim order passed earlier shall continue till the next date of listing. (P.P. Bhatt, J.) Saket/-...
Sanjeet Singh Alias Chhotu Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A.No. 2226 of 2013. ----- Sanjeet Singh @ Chhotu Petitioner. Versus The State of Jharkhand Opposite Party. ..... Coram : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar. ----- For the Petitioner : Sri Prabir Chatterjee For the State : Sri Vikash Kishore, A.P.P. ----- 03/31.07.2013. Anticipatory bail application filed by Sanjeet Singh @ Chhotu is moved by Sri Prabir Chatterjee, learned counsel for the petitioner and opposed by Sri Vikash Kishore, Addl.P.P. for the State. Allegation against this petitioner is similar to co-accused Abhishek Kumar @ Babla. Aforesaid co-accused has been granted regular bail by learned Sessions Judge. Considering the aforesaid fact and circumstance, I allow this application and direct the petitioner, named above, to surrender in the court below by 14/08/2013. If petitioner surrenders by that time, the court below is directed to enlarge the petitioner, named above, on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousa...
Ajeet Kumar Choudhary Alias Ajeet Choudhary Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI A. B. A. No. 2658 of 2013 Ajeet Kumar Choudhary @ Ajeet Choudhary. ... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR ............ For the Petitioner : Mr. H.K. Shikarwar For the State : Mr. G.S. Prasad, A.P.P. ........ 4/31.07.2013 Anticipatory bail application filed by Ajeet Kumar Choudhary @ Ajeet Choudhary is moved by Sri H.K. Shikarwar, learned counsel for the petitioner and opposed by Sri G.S. Prasad, learned Additional PP. for the State. Only allegation against this petitioner that he prepared estimate. There is no allegation that he himself constructed and/or supervised construction of road in the forest area. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstance, I allow this anticipatory bail application and direct the petitioner to surrender in the court below on or before 14th of August 2013 and in the event of his surrender, the learned court below is directed to enlarge him on bail on f...
Jimedar Singh Vs. Information Technology
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 764 of 2013 --- Jimedar Singh --- --- ---- Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand through Principal Secretary, Department of Information Technology, Government of Jharkhand & others --- --- --- Respondents --- CORAM: The Honble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh For the Petitioner: Mr. Ashish Kr. Shekhar, Advocate For the State: Mr. Saket Kr. Upadhyay, JC to AAG --- 02/ 31.07.2013 Heard counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner seeks allotment of Common Service Centre (Pragya Kendra) from the respondent no. 4-United Telecom Limited, Bangalore through its President which is a franchisee for running Common Service Centre in thirteen districts of Jharkhand.3. According to him, he participated in an advertisement issued by the respondent no. 4 and also deposited certain money for allotment of Common Service Centre (Pragya Kendra) which is running in the district of Dhanbad and monitored by the respondent no.4. However, the respondent no....
Raju R. Shete and ors Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr. M. P. No. 135 o1. Raju S.Shete 2.Smt. Hemal R. Shete 3. Sudip Majumdar ..... Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2. Kameshwar Ram . Opp. Party(s) CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD For the Petitioner(s) : M/s V. P. Singh, Sr. Advocate Arun Kr. Singh, A. K. Das, Advocates For the State : Mr. D. K. Chakraborty, A.P.P. ----- 04 /31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties. This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. C2-5371 of 2008, whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 23 and 25 of the Contract Labour [Regulation and Abolition] Act, 1970 has been taken against the petitioners as well as some other accused persons. The case of the complainant is that when inspection was made on 14.10.2008 in the premises of the Tata Motors by the Inspector, appointed under the Contract ...
Rashtriya Colliery Mazdoor San Vs. Employer in Relation to the Ma
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Civil Review No.118 of 2010 Rashtriya Colliery Mazdoor Sangh .... Petitioner Versus Employer in relation to the Management of Kenduadih Colliery of M/S B.C.C.L & others ..... Respondents ---------- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH For the Petitioner : M/s R.S. Mazumdar & Rohit Roy For the Respondents : Mr.A.K.Mehta 04/31.07.2013 Heard counsel for the parties. In the present application petitioner is seeking review of the order dated 24.9.2010 passed by this Court in W.P.L. No. 4915 of 2007. The said order is quoted herein below:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. BCCL Management has filed a supplementary counter affidavit making a clear cut statement in para 5 to 8 that after disposal of the writ petition by judgment dated 18.5.2004 in CWJC Nos. 1654 and 1655 of 1997(R) there has been no vacancy in the post of Tyndal till date and if there is any vacancy in future and the post is a...
Suraj Deo Yadav Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A. B.A. No. 2108 of 2013 Suraj Deo Yadav .........Petitioner Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr........Opposite parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha For the State: Mr. Abhishek Kumar ,APP For the O.P. No. 2: Mr. N.K. Sahani 3/31.07.2013: Anticipatory bail application filed by petitioner Suraj Deo Yadav is moved by Sri Anil Kumar Sinha and opposed by Sri Abhishek Kumar, learned Additional P.P. and Sri N.K. Sahani, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2. At the out set, Sri Anil Kumar Sinha , learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is ready to keep the complainant ( O.P. No.2) as his wife with all honour and dignity and for that purpose he is ready to give written undertaking in the court below. Learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 submits that the complainant is also ready to reside with the petitioner as his wife provided he give undertaking that he will keep her with all respect and dignit...
S.B.Borwankar and ors Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr. M. P. No. 134 o1. S.B. Borwankar 2. P.M. Telang ..... Petitioner(s) Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2. Kameshwar Ram . Opp. Party(s) CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD For the Petitioner(s) : M/s V. P. Singh, Sr. Advocate Arun Kr. Singh, A. K. Das, Advocates For the State : Mr. D. K. Chakraborty, A.P.P. ----- 04 /31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties. This petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. C2-5371 of 2008, whereby and whereunder cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 23 and 25 of the Contract Labour [Regulation and Abolition] Act, 1970 has been taken against the petitioners as well as some other accused persons. The case of the complainant is that when inspection was made on 14.10.2008 in the premises of the Tata Motors by the Inspector, appointed under the Contract Labour [Regulation and ...
Smt.Saraswati Mehra Vs. Hindustan Copper Ltd. and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI WP(S)No.1259of2007 Smt.SaraswatiMehra@SaaswatiMahar... Petitioner Versus HindustanCopperLtd.andors. ... ... Respondents CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICEAPARESHKUMARSINGH ForthePetitioner :Mr.S.Arun FortheRespondents :M/sS.L.Agarwal&A.K.Das 531.7.2013 Heardcounselfortheparties.2. By the impugned order dated 7.11.1988, Annexure6, the petitioner was terminated from service. The petitioner's name has beenremoved form therolloftheofficersofthe company and her servicesstoodterminated.3. The petitioner, at the relevant point of time, was working as MatronundertherespondentCorporation.Itiscontendedonbehalf of the petitioner that she had proceeded on leave after making an applicationon30.4.1988intheofficeofActingChiefMedicalOfficer, enclosing there with a telegram that her mother had died. The petitioner thereafter extended her leave by way of telegram dated 25.5.1988.Itwasfollowedbyanotherletterdated1.6.1988statingthat shehadfallensickandwasundergoingtreatment.Accordin...
Dipen Mandal and ors Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Jul-31-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI B.A.No.5736of2013 1.DipenMandal 2.PutulMandal 3.VishakhaMandal Petitioners Versus TheStateofJharkhand OppositeParty CORAM: HONBLEMR.JUSTICED.N.UPADHYAY ForthePetitioner :Mr.SanatKumarJha,Advocate FortheState :A.P .P. 02/31.07.2013 Heardlearnedcounselfortheparties. Itrevealsfromthefardbeyanthatthedeceasedhadgonetohisinlaws housesituatedatvillageBasmati.HiswifeVishakhawashavingillicitrelation withaccusedSukumarMandal,therefore,hewasdisturbedduetothatillicit relation. Before death the deceased had made a call to the informant and informedthatthereiseverychancethathewouldbemurderedbyhiswifeand inlaws. Thereaftermobileofthedeceasedgotswitchedoff. Theinformant rushedtovillageBasmatiwherehefoundhissondeadinthecourtyardofthe house.Itwasinformedthatthedeceasedhimselfconsumedpoison. It is submitted that one of the accused Sukumar Mandal has been grantedbailbythisCourtvideB.A.No.3950of2013.Petitionersarewifeand parentsinlaw of the deceased. Cause of death till th...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »