Patna Court March 1999 Judgments

Kunj Bihari Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar

Court: Patna

1. These two Appeals arise out of the judgment and order of the 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram dated 1/22.6.1992. The Appellants in Cr. Appeal No. 288 of 1992 are Kunj Bihari Singh, Anil Singh and Bikash Singh while the Appellants in Cr. Appeal No. 294 of 1992 are Rajendra Singh And Nagendra Singh. Appellants Rajendra Singh and Nagendra Singh have been found guilty of the offence under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. They have also been found guilty of the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each.2. Appellants Anil Singh and Kunj Bihari Singh have been convicted under Section 302/34, I.P.C. and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for tw...

Asit Kumar Mukherjee and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. In all the cases, as common point of law is involved, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. The case relates to transfer and posting within the area of Santhal Pargana and Chotanagpur (commonly known as Jharkhand area). The parties have challenged the jurisdiction of one or other authority i.e. State of Bihar or Jharkhand Area Autonomous Council (JAAC).The main question raised for determination is as to whether State of Bihar has jurisdiction to transfer or to post a Gazetted officer within Jharkhand area or such power is vested with the JAAC?3. To determine the aforesaid question, it is necessary to take into consideration the relevant facts as well as individual cases of petitioners, as mentioned hereunder:The State of Bihar promulgated 'Jharkhand Area Autonomous Council Act, 1994' (Bihar Act 13 of 1994) and constituted JAAC for all-round accelerated development of the Jharkhand area which came into effect on 8th March, 19...

Kumar Arun Chandra Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

Nagendra Rai1. The petitioner has filed the present writ application for quashing the order dated 31 st October, 97 passed by the District Magistrate-cum-Licensing Authority, Manager (respondent No. 4) cancelling the settlement of Munger Raj Ferry Ghat made in favour of the petitioner for the calendar year, 1998 and 1999 as well as the fresh advertisement dated 15-11-97 issued for fresh auction of the said Ferry. A copy of the order dated 31-10-97 as well as a copy of the advertisement for auction has been annexed as Annexure 10 and 11 respectively to the writ application.2. The District Magistrate-cum-Licensing authority (respondent No. 4) took steps for settlement of the aforesaid Ferry under the provision of the Bengal Ferry Act and in pursuance of an auction notice an auction was held on 30th December, 1996 and Kumar Arun Chandra Singh (respondent No. 8) offered the highest amount for Rs. 7,89,000/- and his bid was accepted and he was directed to deposit the amount within ten days...

Baso Yadav and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar

Court: Patna

1. Both these appeals, arising out of judgment of conviction ad sentence dated 27.9.1986, passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Nawadah in Sessions Trial No. 142 of 1985, are being disposed of by this common judgment by which appellant Kailash Yadav of Criminal Appeal No. 536 of 1986 was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and was sentenced to undrgo life imprisonment and rigorous imprisonment for five years respectively and the remaining three appellants of criminal Appeal No. 524 of 1986 were convicted under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life thereunder and appellant Basudeo Yadav was further convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years with a direction that sentences would run concurrently.2. The prosecution case, as given in the fardbeyan (Ext. 1/2) of Ram Swarup Chauhan (P.W. 11) recorded at P.O. village Sirpa...

Jibachhi Devi and ors. Vs. Vinod Kumar Thakur and ors.

Court: Patna

N. Pandey, J.1. This appeal has been preferred on behalf of the defendants-1st set appellants under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Patna High Court, against the judgment and decree in F.A. No. 117 of 1966 whereby the judgment and decree in T.S. No.48/60/1/66 with regard to Schedule II lands was reversed.2. It would appear from the facts on record that the plaintiffs had brought the title suit for partition by metes and bounds with respect to the properties described in Schedules I, II and III of the plaint. Schedule I was with regard to movable properties, Schedule II contains the list of the lands situated in village Shahpur and Chithi Hanuman Nagar whereas Schedule II was with respect to the lands situated in Mouja Malarh.3. The case of the plaintiffs, in short, was that one Ramlal Thakur was the common ancestor of the plaintiffs and defendants 1st to 4th party. From the first wife, Ramlal Thakur had four sons and from the second wife, he had two sons. One of the sons of Ram...

Munna Tiwari Vs. the State of Bihar

Court: Patna

B.P. Singh and N.K. Singh, JJ.1. The appellant herein was put up for trial before the 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Arrah in Sessions Trial No. 449 of 1991 charged of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for having committed the murder of Satyanarain Tiwary. The learned 2nd Addl Sessions Judge, Arrah by his judgment and order dated 21st of November, 1992 has found the appellant guilty of the offence under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.2. The case of the prosecution is that deceased Satyanarain Tiwary and the appellant Munna Tiwary were collaterals residing in the same village Manichapara which lies within the jurisdiction of police station Barhara. On 6th of February, 1991 at about 7.30 a.m. while the deceased along with his son and father-in-law was sitting at his Darwaja and gossiping, appellant Munna Tiwary came and picked up a quarrel with him in connection with some land dispute. An altercation followed which attract...

Ram Ballabh Mandal Vs. State of Bihar

Court: Patna

Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and also learned counsel for the State.2. The sole appellant has been convicted under Sections 306 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years under Section 306 and two years under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. However, both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.3. It appears that the appellant along with Bindeshwar Mandal and Lakhan Mandal were put on trial for an offence under Sections 302/34 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and besides Sections 302/34, 201 of the Indian Penal Code no charge was framed under other heads. The learned trial Court, however, has acquitted all the accused persons including the appellants under Sections 302/34 as there was no evidence to prove the charge but convicted the appellant alone under Sections 306 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.4. The prosecution case, as disclosed in the fardbayan (Exhibit-1), is that the sister of the...

State of Bihar Vs. Triloki Singh

Court: Patna

Bisheshwar Prasad Singh, J. 1. The sole appellant herein, namely, Triloki Singh was put up for trial before the 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chapra in Sessions Trial No. 175 of 1997 charged of offence under Sections 302 and 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code having attempted to commit rape on Samshunisha and in the process killing her minor son Naushad who clung to her out of fear at the time of occurrence. It appears from the order-sheet of the trial Court that after the arguments had been concluded in the case, the trial Court framed a charge against the appellant under Section 27 of the Arms Act on 23rd January, 1998 which was read over to the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty. The matter was then put up for argument on 2nd February, 1998 and thereafter by his judgment dated 10th February, 1998 the learned trial Court found the appellant guilty of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The trial Court then heard ...

Ghulam MohsIn Jafri Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

Reported in: AIR1999Pat115; 1999(47)BLJR842

1. Since the main controversy revolves round some questions of law, this case, with the consent of parties has been heard at length at the stage of admission itself and the points are decided as follows :--2. In this matter one I.A. No, 359 of 1999 has been filed by one Saiyed Salman Hussain for allowing him to appear in this matter as an Intervenor-respondent. He is permitted to do so and is heard through his counsel. In fact the main argument in this case has been advanced by the learned counsel for the Intervenor-respondent.3. The factual aspect of the case urged before me at the argument stage is in a narrow compass. The petitioner is claiming himself to be the Chairman of the Bihar State Shia Wakf Board (hereinafter referred to as the said Board) prior to its present constitution under the impugned notification dated 31st December, 1997. The main challenge to that notification, inter alia, is on the ground that the said notification dated 31st December, 1997 by which the present B...

Dinesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

P.K. Sarkar, J.1. This application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 23.7.93 passed by Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Madhopura, in Complaint Case No. 9C/93 whereby cognizance was taken under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and summonses have been ordered to be issued against him.2. Opposite party No. 2 Anand Mohan Mishra, Joint Registrar, Cooperative Society, Kosi and Purnea, Saharsa Division filed an official complaint against the petitioner wherein it was alleged inter-alia that in a monthly meeting of Managers held on 6.7.S3 in which the petitioner was present, one Chandeshwari Ram complained to the petitioner that he was not getting his salary for last five years. This enraged the petitioner and he told him in open meeting that he knew to move his legs, shoes, feet and arms and 'you Chamra' would be okayed within a minute. The said Chandeshwari Ram, thereafter, filed a peti...