Jharkhand Court August 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.
Sonu Rai Alias Sonu Ansari Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr. Appeal [SJ] No. 538 of 2013 Sonu Rai @ Sonu Ansari ..... Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opp. Party(s) CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. D. K. Chakraverty, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. ----- 03 /30.08.2013. Heard learned counsel appearing for the appellant and learned counsel appearing for the State on the matter of bail. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that this appellant as well as co-convict, namely, Imran Khan on being found guilty for the offence under Sections 363 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code, has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 5 years for the offence under Section 363 I.P.C. on the allegation that this appellant and another co-convict enticed away the victim girl, but from the circumstances appearing from the evidences of victim girl, it would appear that the victim had gone in company with this appellant and another co-convict with her own accord and thereby...
Rajesh Khanna Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appl. (SJ) No. 1227 of 2004 with Cr. Appl. (SJ) No. 1233 of 2004 with Cr. Appl. (SJ) No. 1241 of 2004 with Cr. Appl. (SJ) No. 1315 of 2004 Rajesh Khanna........ Appellant (In Cr. Appl. 1227/04) Anil Jaiswal & Ors........ Appellants (In Cr. Appl. 1233/04) Raju Julka........ Appellant (In Cr. Appl. 1241/04) Indra Kumar Julka & Anr........ Appellants (In Cr. Appl. 1315/04) Versus State of Jharkhand Respondent (In all the appeals) CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD For the Appellants : M/s. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate Laljee Sahay & Arun Kumar, Advocates For the State : Mr. APP I.A. Nos. 6398, 6381 of 2013 & 579 o5. 30.08.2013 These interlocutory applications have been filed on behalf of the appellants, wherein prayer has been made to allow the informant to appear in these cases, as the informant happens to be a necessary party particularly when plea has been taken on behalf of the appellants that the parties have entered into a compromise. Pr...
Jagdish Kumar Gulati Vs. the State of Jharkhand Through Cbi
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr. Appeal [S.J.] No. 646 of 2013 Jagdish Kumar Gulati ..... Appellant(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand through C.B.I. . Respondent(s) CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sah, Advocate. For the CBI : Mr. Mokhtar Khan, ASGI ----- 02 /30.08.2013. Admit. Issue notice. Call for the L.C.R. The provisional bail granted to the appellant by the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-II-cum-Special Judge CBI, Dhanbad in connection with R.C. Case No.19(A) /87-D is hereby, confirmed. Let this order be communicated through FAX at the cost of the appellant. (R. R. Prasad, J.) Sandeep/...
A P Kunkal Alias Azad Pradip Kunkal Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 414 of 2013 A.P. Kunkal @ Azad Pradip Kunkal ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand & Another ..... Opposite Parties -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Chandrajit Mukherjee, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. ------ I.A. No. 6314 o6. 30.08.2013 The present interlocutory application has been filed for extension of time to the petitioner for surrendering in the Court below by four weeks, in view of the talks of compromise going on between the parties. At the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is allowed further two weeks for surrendering in the Court below, failing which this application shall stand rejected without further reference to a Bench. The aforesaid interlocutory application stands allowed. (H. C. Mishra, J.) R.Kr....
Pawan Kumar Verma Vs. State of Jharkhand Through Cbi
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr. Appeal [SJ] No. 280 of 2013 Pawan Kumar Verma ..... Appellant(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand through C.B.I. . Respondent(s) CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD For the Appellant(s) : Mr. P. C. Tripathy, Sr. Advocate. For the CBI : Mr. Mokhtar Khan, ASGI ----- I. A. No.6451 of 2013. 07 /30.08.2013. Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the instant I.A. has been filed for grant of provisional bail to the appellant on account of the fact that the wife of the appellant has been suffering from chronic-Ashtama besides other diseases and the severity of the disease has increased to the extent that she needs care of her husband, but no such document is there showing severity of the disease which she has been suffering from before and, therefore, the matter be adjourned for some other day so that in the meantime, necessary document would be filed. As prayed for, let the matter be posted on 6th September, 2013 so that docu...
Deepali Ganguly Vs. Ajay Kumar Ganguly
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Transfer Petition (C ) No. 39 of 2012 Deepali Ganguly .... Petitioner Versus 1. State of Jharkhand 2. Ajay Kumar Ganguly ... Opposite parties Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mr Akshay Kr Mahato For the opp. party State : Mr. Srijit Choudhary 30.08.2013 This transfer petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transfer of Matrimonial Title Suit No. 15 of 2012 from the court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court,Chaibasa( West Singhbhum), to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party has fairly submitted that he has already filed a petition for withdrawal of aforesaid Matrimonial Title Suit No. 15 of 2012, but no order has been passed, because the proceeding has been stayed by this Court by order dated 3.10.2012. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has no objection if the sui...
Sudhir Kumar Sinha Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P. (Cr.) No. 441 of 2010 Sudhir Kumar Sinha ... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand through Vigilance & Anr. Opp. Party ----- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD ----- For the Petitioner : Mrs. Ritu Kumar, Advocate For the Vigilance : Mr. Shailesh, Advocate ----- 11/30.08.2013 The grievance, which has been raised on behalf of the petitioner, is that on the same set of allegation earlier three cases had been lodged against the petitioner, who at the relevant point of time was Amin Inspector. All the three cases were lodged on the allegation that the petitioner did certain manipulation in the map by making cuttings and overwriting over the map. Since three cases had been lodged for the same set of allegation, a writ application bearing W.P. (Cr.) No. 181 of 2008 was filed which was disposed of on 7.5.2010 whereby all three cases lodged against the petitioner were ordered to be amalgamated. Subsequent to that, Vigilance P.S. Case No. 42 of...
Ashok Kumar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors.
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-30-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI W.P.(S)No.3233of2006 AshokKumarSingh ... ... ... Petitioner Versus TheStateofJharkhand&Ors. ... ... ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLEMR.JUSTICESHREECHANDRASHEKHAR ForthePetitioner :Mr.Dr.S.N.Pathak,Sr.Advocate FortheState :Mr.VikashKumar,J.C.toA.A.G. 07/30.08.2013 On 15.04.2009, taking a serious view of the matter, this CourthaddirectedtheRespondentNo.4toremainpresentinthe Courtintheeventthenecessarypapersalongwiththeservicebook ofthepetitionerisnotsenttotheofficeoftheRespondentNo.6. Thematterwasadmittedon27.04.2009.On24.01.2013,whenthe matterwasagainlistedforhearing,attherequestofthecounsel for the respondents, one week's time was granted to ascertain whetherthepensionofthepetitionerwasfinalisedornot.Itwas alsomadeclearthatifthenecessarypaperswerenotsenttothe finance department, the Court may take strict view against the concernedrespondents.Thematterwasagainlistedon19.07.2013 when it was adjourned at the instance of the counsel for the petitioner.Today,...
Veer Singh Alias Birju Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI Cr. Appeal [S.J.] No. 620 of 2013 Veer Singh @ Birju Singh ..... Appellant(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand . Respondent(s) CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R. R. PRASAD For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Richa Sanchita, A.P.P. ----- 02 /30.08.2013. Admit. Issue notice. Call for the L.C.R. The provisional bail granted to the appellant by the learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro in N.D.P.S. Case No.05 of 2011 is hereby, made absolute. (R. R. Prasad, J.) Sandeep/...
Sadhan Chandra Dey Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-30-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6925 of 2013 Sadhan Chandra Dey ..Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .Opposite Party ----- Coram:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate For the Opposite Party : APP --- 06/30-08-2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioner is an accused in the case registered under sections 364/302/201/120B of the Indian Penal Code, and under section 27 of the Arms Act. It has been submitted that though the same prayer was rejected earlier by order dated 26.04.2011 in B.A. No. 8207 of 2010, the petitioner has remained in custody for more than three years; the charge, against the petitioner, was framed on 16.09.2011 but only one witness out of eight charge sheet witnesses has been examined so far; there is no likelihood of trial being concluded in near future; there is no eye witness in the case; the petitioner has been implicated...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »