Skip to content

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.

Aug 21 2013

Laxman Kumar Pandit Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Aug-21-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.4586 of 2013 Laxman Kumar Pandit ..... 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. ----- 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 406/364/379/120B of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Govindpur (Barbadda) P.S. Case No.350 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No.3178 of 2012. From the FIR, it appears that the case was initially instituted for the offence under Section 406 of the IPC by the owner of the bolero vehicle against the driver, as the driver was traceless with the vehicle. Subsequently, it transpired that the driver had been murdered and the vehicle was taken away. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order would show that the petitioner has been made accused in ...


Aug 21 2013

Lakshman Siddu and anr Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Aug-21-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5652 o1. Lakshman Siddu 2. Dimba Siddu ..... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajendra Pd. Gupta For the State : A. P.P. ----- 3/21.8.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Petitioners have been made accused for the offence under Sections 302/201/120B of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Chotanagra P.S. Case No.02 of 2009, corresponding to G.R. No.345 of 2009. From the FIR, it appears that the case relates to murder of the wife of the informant, who was traceless. It is alleged that when the informant was searching his wife, he was assaulted by these petitioners and they also stated that they had committed the murder. Subsequently, the dead body of the deceased was found. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and they are in c...


Aug 21 2013

Anand Prakash Handa Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Aug-21-2013

In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P. No.1662 of 2008 Anand Prakash Handa .......................... Petitioner VERSUS State of Jharkhand and another..............Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioners:Mr.Kalyan Roy For the State : A.P.P 4.21.08.13. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is permitted to remove the defect by tomorrow i.e.22.8.2013. Let this matter be listed along with Cr.M.P.No.1099 of 2013. Meanwhile, the State may file counter affidavit in this case. Until further order, further proceeding of Tandwa P.S. Case no.65 of 2004 (G.R.No.920 of 2004), pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Chatra shall remain stayed. ( R.R. Prasad, J.) ND/...


Aug 21 2013

Biswajeet Patnayak and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Aug-21-2013

In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.M.P. No.986 o1. Biswajeet Patnayak 2. Udayan Das.......................................... Petitioners VERSUS State of Jharkhand and another..............Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioners:Mr.A.K.Das For the State : A.P.P 4.21.08.13. Mr.A.K.Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that since copy of the counter affidavit filed in this case has been served yesterday only, the matter be posted on 4.9.2013. As prayed for, let this matter be listed on 4.9.2013. Till then, interim order passed on 23.7.2013 shall continue. ( R.R. Prasad, J.) ND/...


Aug 21 2013

Md Mukhtar Alam Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Aug-21-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5907 of 2013 Md. Mukhtar Alam @ Mukhtar Alam ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhay Kr. Chaturvedy 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 376/316/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Nawdiha Bazar P.S. Case No.75 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No.2253 of 2012. From the FIR, it appears that there is allegation against the son of the petitioner to have sexually exploited the victim-informant on the false pretext of marrying her, who also became pregnant. It appears that the petitioner has been made accused in this case being the father of the main accused. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner Md. Mukhtar Alam...


Aug 21 2013

Dhruv Kumar Agrawal Vs. State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Aug-21-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4208 of 2012 Dhruv Kumar Agarwal ... ... ... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR ............ For the Petitioner : Mr. Naveen Kumar Jaiswal For the State : Mr. A.P.P. For the Informant Mrs. Vandana Singh ........ 13/21.08.2013 Call for the case diary from the court concerned and put up this case after receipt of the same. In the meantime, interim order passed on 30.01.2013 will continue. (Prashant Kumar, J.) Binit...


Aug 21 2013

Sanjeev Singh Alias Sanjeev 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.7583 of 2013 Sanjeev Singh @ Sanjeev Kumar Singh ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioner : Mr. Anurag Kashypa 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 379/411 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 4/14 fo the Mines ad Mineral Act, in connection with Ramna P.S. Case No.55 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No.744 of 2012. From the FIR, it appears that the petitioner is alleged to be involved in illegal extraction and transportation of stones. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner Sanjeev Singh @ Sanjeev Kumar Singh is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of like am...


Aug 21 2013

Rameshwar Pandey and ors Vs. Primary Secondary and Mass Education Depa ...

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Aug-21-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCH W. P. ( S) No. 633 of 2013 Rameshwar Pandey & others ......................Petitioners. -Versus- The State of Jharkhand & others..Respondents. --- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH --- For the Petitioners : Mr. Ramawatar Sharma, Adv. For the Respondents : J.C. to A.G. ---- 07/21.8.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners claim to be working as Instructors under the Adult & Mass Education Scheme which was closed in the year 2001. In the present writ application, they have moved this Court for directing the respondents to consider their representations for their absorption. They have relied upon a judgment dated 29th June, 2012 (Annexure-3) passed in W.P.(S) No. 5966 of 2008. The said judgment, according to the petitioner, was passed in the light of observation made by Patna High Court in respect of similarly situated persons. The respondents, in their counter affidavit, have categorically stated that the judgment of...


Aug 21 2013

Mukesh Kumar Vs. Metallurgical and Engineering Consulants Through the ...

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Aug-21-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCH W. P. (S) No. 768 of 2013 Mukesh Kumar................ ......Petitioners. -Versus- Metallurgical and Engineering Consultants (India Ltd.) (MECON) & others..Respondents. --- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH --- For the Petitioners : Mr. Sarju Prasad, Adv. For the Respondents : J.C. to G.A. 03/21.8.2013 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the land of the petitioner's father was acquired by the State of Bihar in L.A. Case No. 22 of 1976-77 for the purposes of Hindustan Steel Ltd., Ranchi, against which compensation was also given to the awardee i.e. petitioner's father. Under the terms of the agreement dated 16th July, 1976, especially Clause 7 thereof, the displaced person or his dependent were entitled for consideration of their cases for employment in the Respondents-Organization, MECON Ltd. which is successor in the name of Hindustan Steel Ltd. However, though the respondents have given employment on the same basis of b...


Aug 21 2013

Bhuwan Baitha ? Amit Baitha Vs. State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Aug-21-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 374 of 2011 --- Bhuwan Baitha @ Amit Baitha ..... Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand ...... Respondent --- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI HONBLE MR. JUSTICE P.P.BHATT For the Appellant : Mrs. Jasodhra Tripathy, Advocate. For the respondent : A.P.P. - -- I.A. (Cr.) No. 5964 of 2013 :03. 21.08.2013 In this interlocutory application, the appellant has prayed for his release on bail during pendency of the appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though the appellant's prayer for bail was earlier rejected, he has remained in custody for more than five years; there is no likelihood of appeal being taken up for hearing in near future; the appellant deserves to be released on bail. Learned A.P.P. opposed the appellant's prayer for bail and submitted that there are sufficient materials against the appellant and considering the same, the prayer for bail of the appellant was earlier rejected on meri...


  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial