Patna Court June 1999 Judgments
Mohd. Shafique Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-30-1999
P.K. Deb, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 4.3.1989 passed by the Special Judge (2nd Additional Sessions Judge), Darbhanga, in Sessions Case No. 14 of 1988 convicting the accused-appellant under Section 20(b)(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, shortly called as N.D.P.S. Act, and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 19.9.1987 Daya Shankar Rai, P.W. 9, the then officer-in-charge of Sadar Police Station, Darbhanga, received a confidential report to the effect that the accused-appellant, who was appointed as Chowkidar of cement pole factory, Katrahia, was still living within the premises of the factory although the said factory was closed down about one year back and that he had concealed Ganja within a room of the factory and was doing business with the same. A sanha entry was made on the basis of the report of the spy and then the officer-in-charge...
Tag this Judgment!Kailu Mandal and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-30-1999
P.K. Deb, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 8.2.1989 passed by the then 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Saharsa, in Sessions Trial No. 7 of 1984 whereby and where under the four accused-appellants have been convicted under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years.2. The occurrence took place in the night between 13th and 14th September, 1982 at the house of Sitaram Mandal. This is a case of the prosecution that when the inmates of the house including the informant were sleeping then the accused-appellants along with others had entered inside the house by breaking the doors and committed dacoity. Hullah was raised and then the neighbouring people came and the dacoits attempted to flee away. All other accused could be able to escape except the accused-appellant No. 1, Namely, Kailu Mandal, who was caught red-handed with a country made gun along with live cartridge in his possession. He made ex...
Tag this Judgment!Parshuram Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-30-1999
B.P. Singh, J.1. These seven appeals have been preferred by the appellants, 11 in number, against the judgment and order of the 6th Addl. Sessions Judge, Chapra dated 14th/15th September, 1993 in Sessions Trial No. 87 of 1988/120 of 1993. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge by his impugned, judgment and order has sentenced all the appellants to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Sections 302/149, I.P.C. Appellants Anil Singh, Devendra Singh, Hareram Singh, Parshuram Singh, Dinesh Singh, Sheokumar Singh, Ram Pujan Singh and Munna Singh have been sentenced to undergo three years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 148, I.P.C. Appellants Rameshwar Singh, Ghanshyam Singh and Ram Janam Singh have been sentenced to undergo two years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 147, I.P.C. Appellant-Rameshwar Singh has also been found guilty of the offence under Sections 114/302, I.P.C., but no separate sentence has been passed on this count. In this manner, all the 11 appellants who were p...
Tag this Judgment!Haji Moidur Rahman @ Moidur Rahman and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-30-1999
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.2. In this application prayer has been made to restore Cr. Misc. No. 10344/92, which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 5.12.97.3. It appears from the record that Sri. Md. Gulam Gous, was the sole advocate who was appearing for the petitioner in that Cr. Misc. application and the said application was admitted on 14.8.92 further proceeding was stayed. The matter was again pressed on 11.11.97 before a learned Single Judge and on that day even as none appeared, the case was adjourned. On 5.12.97 this case was dismissed as not pressed for none appearance of the learned Counsel for the petitioner.4. In the instant application, it has been stated that said Md. Gulam Gous joined Judicial Subordinate Service and left the practice in December, 1995 and this fact was not known to the petitioner. He came to know only when warrant of arrest was issued in April, 1999.5. It is very common that when a practising advocate is eit...
Tag this Judgment!Uma Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-30-1999
P.K. Deb, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 26.2.1989 passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Gaya,, whereby and where under the accused-appellant No. 1 Uma Singh has been convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and the other three appellants were also convicted under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and all of them had been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six years.2. At the very out set it should be mentioned that the accused-appellant No. 2 Sridhar Singh who was aged about 80 years at the time of conviction died during the pendency of the appeal and an affidavit has been filed to that effect and hence the appeal has abated against accused-appellant No. 2, Sridhar Singh.3. The prosecution story in brief is that one Madhu Sudan Singh made a statement on 13.12.1982 at 7-30 p.m. in the State Dispensary at Kako alleging therein that on the previous date i.e. on 12.12.1982 at 11 a.m. while he was returning hom...
Tag this Judgment!Manisha Kamendu and ors. Etc. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-30-1999
B.N. Agrawal, J.1. All the five appeals arise out of one Judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of this Court in several writ applications and common questions are involved therein, as such, they are being disposed of by one Judgment. Out of the aforesaid appeals, the first three were heard together and judgment was reserved therein on 10-5-1999. The fourth case was listed thereafter and heard on 13-5-1999 and judgment was reserved directing the same to be delivered along with the judgment of the aforesaid three appeals. The last case was placed for hearing on 14-5-1999 and after hearing the parties judgment was reserved to be delivered along with the first three appeals.2. Both the appellants in L.P.A. No. 506 of 1999 were petitioners in C.W.J.C. No. 8918 of 1998. The sole appellant of L.P.A. No. 507 of 1999 was petitioner No. 3 in C.W.J.C. No. 9348 of 1998 which was filed by four persons. L.P.A. No. 509 of 1999 has been filed by three persons who were petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Swaroop Rai and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-30-1999
P.K. Deb, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 20.2.1989 passed by the then 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga in Sessions Trial No. 74 of 1983 whereby five accused appellants have been convicted under Section 395, I.P.C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years. In total eight persons were put to trial for a charge under Sections 395/325 of the Indian Penal Code but only five accused appellants have been convicted under Section 395, I.P.C. and it was held that charge under Section 325, I.P.C. has not been proved from the side of the prosecution.2. The story, in brief, is that P.W. 6 Ram Chandra Prasad Singh a resident of Samastipur District, had a Kamat in village Bhindua under P.S. Kusheshwar Asthan of this district. On 31.12.1978 in the morning hours at about 9 a.m. while he was at Darwaza of his Kamat house alongwith his Munshi Ram Narain Lal P.W. 3 then three persons passed them by saluting the Informant. Immediately thereaf...
Tag this Judgment!Brajesh Kumar Vs. Bhupendra Singh @ Upendra and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-30-1999
Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard Mr. devendra Kumar Sinha, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Ram Kumar Sharma, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties.2. This revision application is directed against the judgment of acquittal under Section 232 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') dated 13-5-1993 whereby and whereunder the opposite parties have been acquitted.3. It appears that members of the opposite party were sent up for trial for an offence under Sections 302/34 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. It further appears that charges were framed on 17-8-90 and summonses were issued against the prosecution witnesses and thereafter warrants of arrest were also issued against them and since the prosecution witnesses did not turn up for evidence, the case was closed and judgment of acquittal was pronounced by the Court in exercise of its power under Section 232 of the Code.4. Learned Co...
Tag this Judgment!Dineshwar Kumar and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-29-1999
A.K. Prasad, J.1. This criminal appeal at the behest of the appellants is directed against the judgment and order dated 31-3-1989 in S.T. No. 123 of 1985/3 of 1986 passed by Sri Damodar Prasad, the then Addl. Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, whereby and whereunder they have been convicted under Sections 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life thereunder. Further, they have been convicted under Sections 307/149 and 364/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment on each count. They have been further convicted under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months thereunder. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case, in brief, as made out in the fardbeyan (Exhibit 6), is as under:On 10-5-1980, between 4/5 p.m. Baha Oraon (P.W. 3), the informant, in the company of Sheo Prasad Gwala, the deceased, and Hira Kumhar, the...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Ram Briksh Mistry and anr. Vs. Mostt. Sakuntala Devi and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-29-1999
S.K. Katriar, J.1. Heard Mr. Sandeep Kumar Said for the petitioners, and Mr. S.I. Majumdar for the opposite parties.2. The decree-holders are the petitioners. This civil revision application is directed against the order dated 1-3-96, passed by the Execution Munsif, Patria, in Execution case No. 22 of 1990 Ram Briksh Mistri and Anr. v. Mostt. Sakuntala Devi and Ors. whereby the decree-holders' objection with respect to the Pleader-Commissioner's report has been over-ruled.3. Before I enter into the merits of the matter, I must deal with the application for condonation of delay in filing this civil revision application. The impugned order was passed on 1-3-96, and this civil revision application was instituted in this Court on 14-11-96, 24-6-96 being the last date of limitation, there was thus a delay of five months and twenty days in preferring this civil revision application. The petitioners have filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of the delay...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »