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.
Anil Kumar Verma Vs. the Union of Indai Through Cbi
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI Cr. M.P. No. 2305 of 2013 Anil Kumar Verma ... ... ... Petitioner Versus Union of India through C.B.I.... Opp. Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR ............ For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha For the State : Mr. Md. Mokhtar Khan, C.B.I. ........ 2/21.08.2013 This application has been filed for modification of order dated 18.03.2013 passed in A.B.A. No. 4246 of 2012. By the said order, anticipatory bail application of the petitioner rejected with liberty to raise all the points taken in the anticipatory bail application while filing regular bail application in the court below. The Court below was also directed to consider said points while passing order in the regular bail application. Observation given in the last paragraph of order dated 18.03.2013 in A.B.A. No. 4246 of 2012 is very much clear. Thus, no clarification is required to be made. Under the said circumstance, I find no merit in this application. Same is accordingly dis...
illiyash Seikh Alias Iliyash Chaudhary Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 7498 of 2013 Iliyash Sheikh @ Iliyash Chaudhary ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. D.K. Chakraverty, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. -------- 2/ 21.08.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution. The petitioner has been made accused for the offences under Sections 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Balidih P.S. Case No. 114 of 2002 corresponding to G.R. No. 970 of 2002. The case relates to recovery of stolen iron scraps. The petitioner was not apprehended at the spot. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner, Iliyash Sheikh @ Iliyash Chaudhary, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand), with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfacti...
Jitendra Kumar Alias Jitendra Kumar Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5014 of 2013 Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Kumar Singh ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioner : Mr. Mahesh Tewari For the State : A. P.P. ----- 8/21.8.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 364/120B of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Kotwali (S) P.S. Case No.707 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. No.3862 of 2011. There is direct allegation against the petitioner to have abducted the sister of the informant. The informant is the eyewitness to the occurrence. The impugned order shows that the victim lady is still traceless and even the independent eyewitness have supported the fact that she was abducted by this petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Kumar Singh on bai...
Manoj Kumar Sah Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI Cr. M.P. No. 2114 of 2013 Manoj Kumar Sah ... ... ... Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Smt. Shila Devi ... ... Opp. Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR ............ For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kumar Pandey For the State : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, A.P.P. ........ 2/21.08.2013 This application has been filed for modification of order dated 26th June 2013 passed in A.B.A. No. 2211 of 2013, whereby petitioner has been granted bail and directed to surrender in the court below by 06.07.2013. It is submitted that petitioner could not surrender by the aforesaid date, because he was suffering from typhoid. In support of said contention, petitioner annexed medical certificate (Annexure-2). Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstance, this application is allowed and order dated 26th June 2013 passed in A.B.A. No. 2211 of 2013 is hereby modified and date of surrender is extended by 31st of August 2013. (Prashant Kumar, J.) Binit...
Surjit Singh Alias Raje Alias Sarjit Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5889 of 2013 Raj Kumar Saini @ Budhu Saini ..... Petitioner with B.A. No.7165 of 2013 Surjit Singh @ Raje @ Sarjit Singh ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioners : Mr. Nagmani Tiwari (B.A. No.5889 of 2013) For the State : A. P.P. ----- 2/21.8.2013 Both these applications arise out of the same case, as such they are being disposed of by this common order. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Petitioners have been made accused for the offence under Sections 395/412 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Chowka P.S. Case No.07 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No.109 of 2013. The case relates to dacoity, in which an Indigo Car, overtook the chassis and looted 200 liters fuel, tool box, tires, batteries etc., and left the chassis abandoned. The impugned order shows that the petitioners were apprehended in connection wit...
Sharban Mandal Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 5877 of 2013 Sharban Mandal ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. -------- 2/ 21.08.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution. The petitioner has been made accused for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506, 384, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, in connection with Rajmahal P.S. Case No. 46 of 2013 corresponding to G.R. No. 102 of 2013. From the FIR, it appears that there is allegation against the petitioner and other co-accused persons to have gone to the road construction site and to have demanded levy. There is allegation of some assaults also. It appears that another case has been filed against the contractor, in which, there is allegation of irregularities in the road construction and also of threatening...
Habil Cherwa Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.4720 of 2013 Habil Cherwa ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioner : Mr. Deepak Kumar For the State : A. P.P. ----- 6/21.8.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 147/148/149/307/353 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 3 / 4 of the Explosive Substance Act, 17 of the C.L.A. Act and 13/20 of the U.A.P. Act, in connection with Manoharpur P.S. Case No.44 of 2009, corresponding to G.R. No.337 of 2009. From the FIR, it appears that during raid, there was an encounter between the police party and the members of the extremist group but the extremists managed to flee away. From the camp of the extremists, several incriminating articles including the explosives materials were also recovered. No one was apprehended at the spot. ...
Shankar Yadav and ors Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P. No.16 o1. Shankar Yadav 2. Shushil Yadav 3. Sarju Yadav 4.Sunil Yadav 5.Sudhir Yadav 6.Fuchi Mahto 7.Ganesh Yadav @ Gangesh Yadav..................Petitioners VERSUS The State of Jharkhand and another ...........Opposite Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioners :Mr. K.P.Deo For the State :A.P.P 4.21.8.13. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the State. Earlier notice was issued to the opposite party no.2, who after receiving the notice instead of putting appearance through Lawyer sent a written reply to this Court which has been attached with the record. It is the case of the petitioners that on the allegation that the petitioners had cut away a tree in the year 1989 situated at plot no.567, appertaining to Jamabandi no.52 situated in Mouza Panchhiyari Kothiya, District- Deoghar, a case was registered under Section 379 and allied sections of the Indian Penal Code. ...
Suresh Prasad Gupta Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.7585 of 2013 Suresh Prasad Gupta ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Prasad For the State : A. P.P. ----- 2/21.8.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 457/380/511 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Dhanbad (Dhansar) P.S. Case No.321 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No.1256 of 2013. From the FIR, it appears that the petitioner was apprehended while attempting to commit theft. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner Suresh Prasad Gupta 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 M. K. Prajapati, learned Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad, or...
Sadhwa Devi Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Limited Through Its C M D and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-21-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCH W. P. ( S) No. 953 of 2013 Sadhwa Devi......................Petitioner. -Versus- Bharat Coking Coal Limited & anr. ..Respondents. --- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Raj Mangal Singh, Adv. For the Respondents : Mr. Ananda Sen, Adv. ---- 06/21.8.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner's grievance is that her application for compassionate appointment on account of death of her husband in harness on 28th October, 2006 in the employment of Respondents-BCCL as Miner Loader at East Basuria Colliery, Area VI, has not yet been disposed of. She made her application immediately after the death of her husband and thereafter she was directed to furnish certain documents vide Annexure-1 dated 9th March, 2009 to which she also responded. She was also examined by Medical Board but till date no decision has been taken. Learned counsel for the Respondents-BCCL submits that the respondents shall take a...
- ‹ Prev
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- Next ›
- Last »