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.
Ashok Kumar Kejriwal and anr Vs. State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-19-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI W.P. (C) No. 2759 of 2005 Ashok Kumar Kejriwal and another .. ... ... Petitioners Versus State of Jharkhand and others ... ... ... Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR ............ For the Petitioners : M/s Rahul Gupta, Niyati Shah, K.K. Singh For the Respondents : M/s V.K. Prasad, I.A. No. 3084 o14. 19.09.2013 Nobody appeared to press this interlocutory application. Accordingly, I.A. No. 3084 of 2007 is dismissed as not pressed. I.A. No. 2234 of 2007 Nobody appeared to press this interlocutory application. Accordingly, I.A. No. 2234 of 2007 is dismissed as not pressed. I.A. No. 2962 of 2007 Nobody appeared to press this interlocutory application. Accordingly, I.A. No. 2962 of 2007 is dismissed as not pressed. W.P. (C) No. 2759 of 2005 As prayed, put up this case on 26.09.2013. (Prashant Kumar, J.) Binit...
Raju Sahu Alias Dhundha Sahu Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-19-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 7117 of 2013 Raju Sahu @ Dhundha Sahu ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Gaurav, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. -------- 2/ 19.09.2013 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 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 323, 326, 307, 449, 302 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 17(i)(ii) of the C.L.A. Act, in connection with Simdega P.S. Case No. 145 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 495 of 2012. The case relates to murder of husband of the informant and the informant was also injured in the occurrence. There is allegation against 10 to 15 unknown members of the extremist group to have entered in the house and to have fired firearms upon them, causing death of the deceased and injuring the informant. From ...
Kush Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-19-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 6995 of 2013 Sonu Dubey Versus The State of Jharkhand with B. A. No. 7055 of 2013 Law Singh Versus The State of Jharkhand with B. A. No. 7071 of 2013 Kush Singh Versus The State of Jharkhand -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. S.S. Prasad, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. -------- 2/ 19.09.2013 All these three bail applications arise out of the same case and as such, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order. Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution. The petitioners have been made accused for the offences under Sections 302, 120(B), 201 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, in connection with Sadar (Town) P.S. Case No. 166 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. No. 707 of 2011. The case relates to abduction and murder of the brother of the informant and the case was instituted against unknown. It appears that other ...
Prem Sagar Paswan Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-19-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 7082 of 2013 Prem Sagar Paswan ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. -------- 3/ 19.09.2013 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 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Jharia (Lodna) P.S. Case No. 171 of 2013 corresponding to G.R. No. 1679 of 2013. There is direct allegation against the petitioner to have committed rape upon a minor girl, calling her in his house on the false pretext of teaching her. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a handicapped person, suffering from 75% of disablement in lower limb. In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner, Prem Sagar Paswan , on bail. Accordi...
Lawlesh Ganjhu Alias Rahul Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-19-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 7083 of 2013 Lawlesh Ganjhu @ Rahul ..... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Chaturvedi, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. -------- 2/ 19.09.2013 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 385, 387, 216A, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act, in connection with Chandwa P.S. Case No. 41 of 2013 corresponding to G.R. No. 162 of 2013. The case was instituted on the basis of written report submitted by the Police Officer, in which, it is stated that he had apprehended the petitioner along with Rs. 33000/- and some naxal documents and the said amount was the amount of levy. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner, Lawlesh Ganjhu @ Rahul, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, ...
Siya Sharan Prasad Vs. the State of Jharkhand and ors
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No.612 of 2012 Siya Sharan Prasad Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand & Others Opp. Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajan Raj, Advocate For the Opp. Parties : Mr. Shamim Akhtar, Advocate Mr. Dhananjay Kr. Dubey, Advocate Mr. Akshay Kumar Mahato, Advocate 09/ 18.09.2013 In view of the directions given by this Court, the Secretary, GEL Middle School, Umbulbaha, Khunti is present and the pension papers are handed over to him by the petitioner to which he will verify and give receipt of the documents. So far as D.S.E., Khunti is concerned, she has not filed any affidavit to acquaint this Court with the latest development with regard to payment of the arrear of the salary. It is orally contended by the...
Amit Praon Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (D.B) No. 461 of 2005 Amit Oraon .. Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Respondent ----- CORAM HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI HONBLE MR. JUSTICE P. P. BHATT ----- For the Appellant - Mr. D.K.Prasad For the State - Mr. A.P.P ----- 5/18.9.2013 I. A. (Cr.) No. 6197/2013 In this application, the appellant has prayed for his release on bail, during pendency of this appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though the appellant's same prayer was earlier rejected on merit by this Court, he has remained in custody for more than eleven years; the appellant's conviction is based on contradictory testimony of so called eye-witnesses; incriminating arm was not recovered; the place of occurrence could not be proved by the prosecution; so called eye-witnesses are highly interested witnesses and their testimony, without any corroboration by independent evidence, is not reliable; there is no likelihood of the appeal bei...
Mahadeo Yadav and ors. Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (DB) No.1256 of 2006 1. Mahadeo Yadav 2. Binod Yadav 3. Most. Tukni Appellants. Versus The State of Jharkhand. .... Respondent. CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI HONBLE MR. JUSTICE P. P. BHATT For the Appellants: Mr. H. K. Shikarwar, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. I.A. (Cr.) No.6390 of 2013:05. 18.09.2013: In this interlocutory application, Appellant No.1Mahadeo Yadav and Appellant No.2Binod Yadav have prayed for their release on bail during pendency of the appeal. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that though the appellants' same prayer was earlier rejected, they have remained in custody for more than seven years; Appellant No.3 Most. Tukni has been granted bail by this Court by order dated 3rd January, 2007; the appellants belong to same family; they have been falsely implicated in the case due to land dispute; the conviction is based on...
Sunil Kachap Alias Sunil Oraon and ors Vs. the State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 6898 o1. Sunil Kachap @ Sunil Oraon 2. Kamla Devi 3. Munni Kumari ..... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .. Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Dilip Kumar Prasad, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. -------- 2/ 18.09.2013 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution. The petitioners have been made accused for the offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Angara P.S. Case No. 53 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 3790 of 2012, S.T. No. 175 of 2013. The case relates to dacoity and the case was instituted against unknown. From the impugned order, it appears that the petitioners have been made accused in this case only on the basis of confessional statements. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners, Sunil Kachap @ Sunil Oraon, Kamla Devi and Munni Kumari, on bail. Accordingly, the ...
Krishna Sah Vs. State of Jharkhand
Court: Jharkhand
Decided on: Sep-18-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (DB) No.1314 of 2005 Krishna Sah ......Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand .Respondent ----- Coram:HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.P. BHATT ---- For the Appellant : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, Advocate For the State : APP --- I.A. No. 6855 o08. 18-09-2013 In this I.A., the appellant has prayed for his release on bail during pendency of the appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that though his same prayer was earlier rejected, he has remained in custody for more than 10 years; there is no likelihood of appeal being taken up for hearing in near future. Learned APP opposed the appellant's prayer and submitted that his prayer for bail was earlier rejected twice on merit; there is direct allegation against the appellant and the same has been supported by two eye witnesses as well as the medical evidence. Regard being had to the facts that the appellant's prayer was earlier rejected on meri...
- ‹ Prev
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- Next ›
- Last »