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.
Chhotu Alias Sarfaraj Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6135 of 2013 Chhotu @ Sarfaraj ..... Petitioner with B.A. No.6165 of 2013 Pankaj Singh .... Petitioner with B.A. No.7577 of 2013 Iqbal @ Noor Alam .... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioners : Mr. Shailendra Jit (in B.A. No.6135 and 6165 of 2013) Mr. Prabhat Kr. Sinha (in B.A. No.7577 of 2013) For the State : A. P.P. ----- 2/31.8.2013 These three applications arise out of the same case, as such, they are being disposed of by this common order. Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Petitioners have been made accused for the offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Patratu (Barkakana) P.S. Case No.40 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No.602 of 2012. The case relates to dacoity and the case was instituted against unknown. Learned Counsels for the petitioners have submitted that petitioners have been...
Sanjay Karmali and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6240 o1. Sanjay Karmali 2. Santosh Karmali ..... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioners : Mr. Praveen Shankar Dayal For the State : A. P.P. ----- 2/31.8.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Petitioners have been made accused for the offence under Sections 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Mandu (Kuju) P.S. Case No.111 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No.1084 of 2013. The case relates to kidnapping of two minor girls and there is allegation against these petitioners to have kidnapped them. Both the girls were recovered and their statements were recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., wherein both of them have disclosed their age to be16 years and the Court below has also assessed their age to be about 16 years. They have stated that they had gone on their own along with the petitioners and they als...
Pradeep Thakur Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6684 of 2013 Pradeep Thakur .... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand ....... ... Opposite PartY Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mr. Rajesh Kumar For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 31.8.2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. Petitioner is accused in connection with Nawadih PS case No. 21 of 2013 for the offence registered under section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. There is allegation in the written report that the petitioner proposed to marry the informant and established physical relation with her which was known to other family members, because they had also agreed to solemnize marriage between informant and the accused. On this pretext, the petitioner was enjoying sexual relation with the informant from the year 2009 to 2012. When the brother of the accused did not agree for marriage, this case has been lodged. It is submitted that the informant was...
Pankaj Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6135 of 2013 Chhotu @ Sarfaraj ..... Petitioner with B.A. No.6165 of 2013 Pankaj Singh .... Petitioner with B.A. No.7577 of 2013 Iqbal @ Noor Alam .... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioners : Mr. Shailendra Jit (in B.A. No.6135 and 6165 of 2013) Mr. Prabhat Kr. Sinha (in B.A. No.7577 of 2013) For the State : A. P.P. ----- 2/31.8.2013 These three applications arise out of the same case, as such, they are being disposed of by this common order. Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Petitioners have been made accused for the offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Patratu (Barkakana) P.S. Case No.40 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No.602 of 2012. The case relates to dacoity and the case was instituted against unknown. Learned Counsels for the petitioners have submitted that petitioners have been...
Raju Hazari and ors Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI A. B. A. No. 1412 o1. Raju Hazari 2. Mukesh Hazari 3. Ranjeet Hazari 4. Bhola Hazari ... ... ... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR ............ For the Petitioners : Mr. N.N. Pd. Choudhary For the State : Mr. Awanikant Prasad, A.P.P. ........ 7/31.08.2013 Put up this case after one week, as prayed by Additional PP. In the meantime, interim order passed on 30.07.2013 will continue. (Prashant Kumar, J.) Binit...
Dhaneshwar Singh Ghatwar Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 5069 of 2013 Dhaneshwar Singh (Ghatwar) ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. -------- 6/ 31.08.2013 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 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, in connection with Bermo (Tenughat) P.S. Case No. 101 of 1998 corresponding to G.R. No. 836 of 1998, S.T. No. 178 of 2013. The impugned order shows that the petitioner was not apprehended at the spot, rather, he had been named by the apprehended co-accused and finally the charge sheet was submitted against him and he was declared to be absconder. The impugned order also shows that the petitioner is in custody in connection with this case since 23.3.2013 itse...
Ashok Kumar Yadav Alias Ashok Kr Yadav Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6239 of 2013 Ashok Kumar Yadav @ Ashok Kr. Yadav ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate & Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate For the State : A. P.P. ----- 3/31.8.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 302/307/328/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Godda (T) P.S. Case No.35 of 2005, corresponding to G.R. No.136 of 2005. The case relates to murder of the husband and the son of the informant by poisoning and in the FIR, there is suspicion and allegation against other co-accused persons. It is only shown in the FIR that earlier the informant was running a school along with the petitioner and they had separated. It appears that the petitioner was granted anticipatory bail by this Court by order dated 22.9.2005 in A.B....
iqbal Alias Noor Alam Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.6135 of 2013 Chhotu @ Sarfaraj ..... Petitioner with B.A. No.6165 of 2013 Pankaj Singh .... Petitioner with B.A. No.7577 of 2013 Iqbal @ Noor Alam .... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand . Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA For the Petitioners : Mr. Shailendra Jit (in B.A. No.6135 and 6165 of 2013) Mr. Prabhat Kr. Sinha (in B.A. No.7577 of 2013) For the State : A. P.P. ----- 2/31.8.2013 These three applications arise out of the same case, as such, they are being disposed of by this common order. Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. Petitioners have been made accused for the offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Patratu (Barkakana) P.S. Case No.40 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No.602 of 2012. The case relates to dacoity and the case was instituted against unknown. Learned Counsels for the petitioners have submitted that petitioners have been...
israfil Mian Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-31-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 6291 of 2013 Israfil Mian ..Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .Opposite Party ----- Coram:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI For the Petitioner : Mr. Mohit Prakash, Advocate For the Opposite Party : APP --- 04/31-08-2013 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 366-A/365/371/372 of the Indian Penal Code, and under section 23 of the J.J.Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has been falsely implicated in the case; the allegation is improbable and unbelievable; there is inordinate delay of six days in lodging the FIR; he is a local permanent resident and there is no chance of his absconding. Learned A.P.P. opposed the petitioner's prayer for bail and submitted that there are sufficient materials collected in course of investigation which go to show complicity of the petitioner; the vict...
Md Jalil Ansari Alias Md Jalil Vs. the State of Jharkhand and anr
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Aug-31-2013
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFJHARKHANDATRANCHI B.A.No.6305of2013 [email protected]. .Petitioner. Versus TheStateofJharkhand. ....OppositeParties. CORAM:HONBLEMR.JUSTICENARENDRANATHTIWARI ForthePetitioner : Mr.N.K.Prasad,Advocate FortheState :02. 31.08.2013: Thepetitionerisanaccusedinthecaseregisteredunder Sections376and511oftheIndianPenalCode. Learnedcounselforthepetitionersubmittedthatboyand girlhavesettledtheirmatterandassuchthepetitionerdeserves theprivilegeofbail. Nobodyappearstoopposethepetitioner'sprayerforbail. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perusedtherecord,Ifindthatthepetitionerisanaccusedfor theoffenceunderSection376oftheIndianPenalCode,whichis notcompoundable. In view of the above, I am not inclined to release the petitioner,abovenamed,onbail. Accordingly,petitioner'sprayerforbailisrejected. (NarendraNathTiwari,J.) Sanjay/...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »