Skip to content

Jharkhand Court September 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.

Sep 20 2013

Chandan Basak Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Sep-20-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8731 of 2013 Chandan Basak ... ....Petitioner Vs. The State of Jharkhand ....Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mr. S.S. Choudhary For the State: Ms. Anita Sinha, APP 4/20.09.2013: Bail application filed by petitioner Chandan Basak in connection with Rajmahal P.S. Case No. 63 of 2011 ( G.R. No. 117 of 2011, S.C. No. 283 of 2011) pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1st, Rajmahal is moved by Sri S.S. Choudhary and opposed by Ms. Anita Sinha, learned Additional P.P. It appears that on three occasions the bail prayer of petitioner rejected after considering the merit of the case. I find no fresh ground to reconsider the same. Accordingly, the bail application of the petitioner rejected. ( Prashant Kumar,J.) Sharda/-...


Sep 20 2013

Amarendra Kumar Singh Vs. Mahalal Murmu and ors.

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Sep-20-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Misc. Appeal No.274 of 2003 Amrendra Kumar Singh Appellant Versus Mahalal Murmu & Others Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Appellant : Mr. Mitul Kumar, Advocate 07/ 20.09.2013 I.A. No.1393 of 2012 has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 of M.A. No.274 of 2003 with a prayer to allow them to withdraw the statutory amount of Rs.12,500/ deposited by the appellant since the appeal preferred against interim order passed by the Tribunal has been dismissed by this Court vide order No.6, dated 11.01.2007. Prayer is allowed. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are at liberty to withdraw the amount of interim compensation deposited by the appellant by way of statutory deposit after executing proper receipt and document and that too after proper identification. I.A...


Sep 20 2013

Joshna Devi Alias Joshna MahtaIn Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Sep-20-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 7188 of 2013 Joshna Devi @ Joshna Mahtain Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand Opposite Party --------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAV K. GUPTA --------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Kumar Nilesh, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. --------- th 02/Dated:20. September, 2013 The petitioner has been made accused for the offence registered under Section 304/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no evidence against the petitioner to show his complicity in crime and none of the independent impartial witness have alleged the involvement of this petitioner in the alleged offence. It is also submitted that the petitioner has been made an accused on the basis of suspicion and is in custody since 03.05.2012 and till date only two witnesses have been examined. Learned A.P.P has opposed and submitted that in paras 4, 11, 17, 18, 66, 67 of the case diary witnesses have alleged tha...


Sep 20 2013

Mosemat Darbi Devi Vs. Renu Kothari and ors

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Sep-20-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI M.A. No.254 of 2007 Mosemat Darbi Devi Appellant Versus Renu Kothari & Others Opp. Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Appellant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate 11/ 20.09.2013 I.A. No.4848 of 2013 has been filed with a prayer to allow the appellant for substituted service of notice against R1 who happens to be owner of the vehicle. Prayer is allowed. The appellant is directed to take steps for substituted service of notice for which draft notice may be produced by him within two weeks in the office and the counsel appearing for the appellant shall collect the same and get it published in local English news paper whose circulation is available at Annakapalli, districtVishakhapatnam. Andhra Pradesh. ...


Sep 20 2013

Triloki Prasad Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Sep-20-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2389 of 2013 Triloki Prasad ... ....Petitioner Vs. The State of Jharkhand ....Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mr. V.K. Tiwary For the State: Mr. S.K. Srivastava, APP 3/20.09.2013: Anticipatory bail application filed by petitioner Triloki Prasad is moved by Sri V.K. Tiwary and opposed by Sri S.K. Srivastava, learned Additional P.P. It appears that petitioner implicated in this case on the basis of some secret information that he is indulged in illegal trade of spirit. There is no direct evidence against the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstance, I allow this application and direct the petitioner to surrender in the court below by 01.10.2013 and in that event the court below is directed to enlarge the petitioner, above named, on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., H...


Sep 20 2013

Raj Kumar Poddar and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Sep-20-2013

In the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi Cr.Rev. No.665 o1. Raj Kumar Poddar @ Raj Kumar 2. Samir Kumar Biswas.................. .................Petitioners VERSUS State of Jharkhand through C.B.I and another.. Opposite Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR.JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD For the Petitioners: Mr. Ananda Sen For the C.B.I : Mr.Niranjan Kumar For the Bank : Mrs.A.R.Choudhary 19/ 20.9.13. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw this application with a liberty to raise all the points which have been raised in this application during trial. Reserving the aforesaid liberty, this application is permitted to be withdrawn. ( R. R. Prasad,J.) ND/...


Sep 20 2013

Sukman Ansari Alias Sukman Mian and ors Vs. State of Jharkhand and anr

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Sep-20-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M. P. No. 1190 o1. Sukman Ansari @ Sukman Mian 2.Suleman Ansari @ Suleman 3.Samser Mian @ Samser Ansari 4.Manzoor Ansari 5.Safeda Bibi 6.Kalima Bibi ... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand and another Opp. Parties ----- CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE R.R. PRASAD ----- For the Petitioners : Mr. N.N. Pd. Choudhary, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. ----- 2/20.08.2013 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a case was registered under Sections 147, 337, 323, 324, 307 and 504 of Indian Penal Code and on investigation, charge-sheet was submitted showing the allegation to be true for commission of the offences for which first information report was lodged, but the court below has taken cognizance under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code apart from the other offences though no such material is there for constituting offence under Section 307 of Indian Penal Code. Since the petitioners may very well take this point at the time of discharge ...


Sep 20 2013

Parwati Devi Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Sep-20-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2405 of 2013 Parwati Devi ... Petitioner -V e r s u s- The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR. For the Petitioner : - Mr. Sameer Saurabh, Advocate For the State : - Mr. Tapas Roy, A.P.P. 03/20.09.2013 Anticipatory bail application filed by Parwati Devi, is moved by Sri Sameer Saurabh, learned counsel for the petitioner and opposed by Sri Tapas Roy, learned Additional P.P. for the State. This is a case under Sections 304B read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. Petitioner is sister-in-law of deceased. It appears that the deceased was examined by ASI Shankar Prasad Manjhi of Pandra Out Post, Ranchi on 06.01.2013. In the said statement, she stated that she caught fire due to accident. She had not alleged anything against this petitioner and / or any other members of her in-laws family. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I allow the anticipatory bail application and direct petitio...


Sep 20 2013

Dr. Kuldip NaraIn Jaisawal and Vs. Sri Sheo NaraIn Jaiswal and ors

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Sep-20-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI M.A. No. 18 of 2003 Dr. Kuldip Narain Jaiswal & another .... Appellants Versus Sri Sheo Narain Jaiswal & others Respondents --- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. UPADHYAY --- For the Appellants : Mr. Ayush Aditya --- 14/ 20.09.2013: I.A. No. 961 of 2012 has been filed under Order XXXIX Rule 2-A to take appropriate action against the respondent No. 1 who has violated the order passed by this court in I.A. No. 2458 of 2006 dated 10.10.2006. It is pointed out that the respondent No. 1 has no regard for the law and he is proceeding as per his wishes and flouting the court's order. It is apparent from the said order that this respondent was not appearing on the date when the order was passed. Now it transpires from the record that respondents No. 1 has appeared through his counsel Mr. Dilip Kumar Prasad and he has filed Vakalatnama, but the name of learned counsel is not appearing in the cause list. Let the name of Mr. Dilip Kumar Prasad may appear i...


Sep 20 2013

Md Mumtaz Ansari Alias Md Mumtaz Ansari and anr Vs. the State of Jhark ...

Court: Jharkhand

Decided on: Sep-20-2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2754 o1. Mumtaz Ansari @ Md. Mumtaz Ansari 2. Firoz Ansari @ Firoj Alam ... ....Petitioners Vs. The State of Jharkhand ....Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR For the Petitioner: Mr. Md. Zaid Ahmad For the State: Mr. Pawan Kumar Choudhary, APP Re: I.A. No. 7222 o2. 20.09.2013: I.A. No. 7222 of 2013 has been filed for withdrawal of anticipatory bail application so far it relates to petitioner no. 1, namely, Mumtaz Ansari @ Md. Mumtaz Ansari is concerned. In view of the statements made in this Interlocutory Application, the same is allowed and anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of petitioner no. 1, namely, Mumtaz Ansari @ Md. Mumtaz Ansari is dismissed as withdrawn. ( Prashant Kumar,J.) Sharda/-...


  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial