Patna Court February 1998 Judgments
Dr. Srikant Sharma and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-26-1998
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. The petitioners, all principals of different Colleges under the Magadh University (University for short) have challenged the notice contained in letter dated 31st July, 1996 by which it has been intimated that the constitution of Commission having been declared illegal by the High Court and Supreme Court, appointment of the petitioners made on recommendation of such illegally constituted Commission is illegal and so why their services be not terminated.2. At the time of hearing of the case the counsel for the University raised a preliminary objection and submitted that the Court should not interfere in the matter, as merely a show cause notice has been issued to the petitioners and no final decision has been taken, which I will discuss at an appropriate stage.3. The admitted fact show that the University through the Bihar State University (Constituent Colleges) Service Commission (Commission for short) came out with Advertisement No. I/U.S.C./92 in the newspape...
Tag this Judgment!National thermal Power Corporation Vs. Surendra Prasad Jha and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-24-1998
B.M. Lal, C.J. 1. The order in this revisionpetition shall govern the disposal of the following revision petitions-:-- 1.C.R. No. 1945 of 1994(N.T.P.C. v. Yogendra Prasad Sah and others). 2. C.R. No. 1947 of l994(N.T.P.C. v. Bhuneshwar Yadav and another). 3. C.R. No. 1948 of 1994(N.T.P.C. v. Sri Ram Singh and another). 2. This revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the order dated 15-7-1994 whereby the learned Land Acquisition Judge rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Order 47, Rule 1, C.P.C. to review the earlier award dated 15-4-1993, inter alia, on the ground that the applicant-petitioner N.T.P.C. was not a party in the original reference case and if the party to the original land acquisition case had any grievance against the award, it should have preferred the appeal. 3. Shri Mihir Kumar Jha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that in U. P. Awas Evam Vikas Parishad v. Cyan Devi, AIR 1995 SC ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Bihar and anr. Vs. Puran Chandra Mahto
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-24-1998
1. This appeal presented by and on behalf of the State is barred by 99 days and, therefore, an application for extension of period of limitation has been made, learned counsel Mr. K. P. Yadav appearing for the State and Mr. A. K. Singh for respondent heard. 2. This case was listed on 4-11 -97 when this Court directed for an enquiry to be conducted by the Department concerned fixing responsibility as to on whose fault the appeal could not be presented in time so that appropriate action may be taken by the Department concerned against the erring officer. It has also been observed that a common practice has been developed to file almost all the appeals on behalf of the State after the lapse of the period of limitation without showing sufficient cause and good cause which actually prevented the officers of the State to file the appeal well within the period of limitation. 3. In this case even on the date of hearing of argument before the learned single Judge none appeared to defend and...
Tag this Judgment!Station Club Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-24-1998
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.1. Impugning the Notification No. 23-1/97-648 dated 22.3.1997 so far it relates to the petitioner, Mr. Tapen Sen appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that even assuming that the petitioner has no foundamental right to do trade or business in liquor but the State Government cannot enhance licence fee enormously. Further contention is that in the name of transfering its privilege the State cannot issue a notification clubbing all the clubs irrespective of its situation in town, city or village.2. The petitioner runs a club in the name and style of 'Station Club' in the town of Hazaribagh and for the benefits of its members they supply liquor to them. The petitioner paid licence fee and obtained a licence which was renewed for the years 1996-97. Therefore, for renewal of licence, fees for the years 1997-98 was deposited of Rs. 1,976 on 6.2.1997 with an application for renewal. By memo dated 30th March, 1997 petitioner's club was informed regarding re...
Tag this Judgment!Sheo Shankar Sah Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-23-1998
1. Heard the learned counsels for the parties. The petitioner is an income-tax assessee and is being prosecuted for offences punishable under sections 276C and 276CC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') vide complaint case No. 383 of 1992 pending before the Special Court of Economic Offences at Muzaff rpur. The petitioner seeks quashing of his criminal prosecution on the ground that it was wholly arbitrary and without application of mind and in violation of the principles of equity and natural justice.2. It appears that the Assistant Commissioner (O.P. No. 3) filed a complaint petition (Annexure-1) alleging that for the assessment year 1988-89 assessment had been completed under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on account of non-compliance of notices issued under sections 148 and 142(1), etc., and the Assessing Officer had estimated the total turnover of Rs. 50 lakhs and the net income thereon at Rs. 8 lakhs.A...
Tag this Judgment!Upendra Prasad and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-23-1998
P.K. Sarkar, J.1. This Criminal Appeal arises out of judgment and order dated the 10th September, 1986 passed by Sri Hari Krishna Prasad, 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nawadah in Sessions Trial No. 27/613 of 1986/84, whereby he found appellant Nos. 1 and 2, namely, Upendra Prasad and Kailash Prasad guilty under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the Code') and sentenced each of them to undergo R.I for life. The learned Additional Sessions Judge also found appellant No. 3, Paras Prasad guilty under Sections 307 of the Code and 27-A of the Arms Act and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for five years and three years respectively, and also ordered that the aforesaid sentences will run concurrently. He also found the appellant No. 2 guilty under Section 147 of the Code and other two appellants, namely, appellant Nos. 1 and 3 guilty under Section 148 of the Code, but no separate sentence was passed against them under the aforesaid Section. However, one of the accused, namely,...
Tag this Judgment!Vinay Prasad Chauhan and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-23-1998
P.K. Sarin, J.1. Heard.2. In the supplementary affidavit, it has been stated that the Petitioner No. 2 Sanjay Chauhan, is aged about fourteen and a half years, which shows that the Petitioner No. 2 is claiming himself to be juvenile. However his age does not appear to have been determined by a Juvenile Court under Section 32 of the Juvenile Justice Act. If an accused is juvenile, the Juvenile Court has to first determine his age under Section 32 of the Juvenile Justice Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') after holding due inquiry. If after such enquiry the accused is found to be juvenile then his bail matter will have to be considered under Section 18 of the Act and not under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.3. In the present case, the age of Petitioner No. 2 does not appear to have been determined by a Juvenile Court under Section 32 of the Act, so there is no option but to remit his case to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, who shall be deemed to be exercisin...
Tag this Judgment!Dadu @ Lusha Munda and anr. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-23-1998
A.K. Prasad, J.1. This Criminal Appeal on the. behest of the appellants (Dadu @ Lusha Munda and Dubai Munda) is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 24.2.1996 in S.T. No. 332 of 1992 passed by Sri A.P. Ram, Additional Sessions Judge, Seraikella, whereby and whereunder he convicted the appellants under Section 302/34 of the IPC for causing murder of Ram Singh Munda and under Section 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code for causing disappearance of the evidence of murder with the common intention of screening themselves from legal punishment. The appellants have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302/34 of the IPC. They have been further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each under Section 201/34 of the IPC and to pay a fine of Rs. 400/- each and in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for two months. Both the substantive sentences under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 of the IPC have been directed t...
Tag this Judgment!Chandra Shekhar Kumar Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-20-1998
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.1. Heard Mr. B.B. Sinha for the petitioner and Mrs. Sheela Prasad for the State.In this revision petition the petitioner has impugned the order dated 20.12.1997 by reason of which the learned Sessions Judge while agreeing with the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 23.10.1997, has refused to release the petitioner on bail.2. Some undisputed facts are that the petitioner who is an accused for offence under Sections 302/34 of the Penal Code moved several bail applications repeatedly, before regular criminal Court and, thereafter, upto the High Court but without any success. All those bail applications were filed under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (shortly Cr PC) and taking into consideration the allegation made against the petitioner, his prayer for bail was refused.3. However, when the Medical Board found that the petitioner is a juvenile as he appears to be below 16 years of age, he moved the learned Court below for grant of bail un...
Tag this Judgment!MatadIn Agarwal Vs. Keshar Mal Agarwal
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-20-1998
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This review application has been filed by the defendant-petitioner for review of the Judgment dated 27.4.1995 passed by this Court in Civil Revision No. 381 of 1992.2. This case has a very chequered history. The plaintiff-Opposite party filed Title Suit No. 104 of 19S3 for eviction of the defendant-petitioner form the suit premises which is shop room in the ground floor in the building belonging to the plaintiff. The suit was filed on the ground of bona fide personal necessity of the eldest son of Pawan Kumar Agarwal, who was allegedly sitting idle since after the marriage. The suit was contested by the defendant-petitioner on the ground inter alia that there is no bona fide personal need inasmuch as other shops in the same building are fallen vacant. The suit was dismissed in 1985. The plaintiff-Opposite party filed Title Appeal No. 33 of 1985 which was ultimately allowed and the matter came to this Court in Civil Revision No. 37 of 1987 (R) at the instance of defend...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »