Patna Court December 2000 Judgments
Madan Mohan Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-20-2000
Shiva Kirti Singh, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The writ petitioner is a Mining Inspector in the service of Government of Bihar who has challenged order dated 19.9.2000 (Annexure-5) whereby certain employees of the Mines Department, Government of Bihar have been transferred to different places including the petitioner and respondent No. 5, another Mines Inspector. The petitioner has been transferred from District Mining Office, Deoghar to that at Patna whereas respondent No. 5 has been transferred and posted to the post earlier held by petitioner at Deoghar.3. According to learned Counsel for the petitioner, the impugned order is bad in law for the following reasons:(1) The narration of certain facts in the beginning of the order shows that transfers in question are being made by way of partial amendment to these earlier orders all dated 29.6.2000 but since those three orders do not relate to earlier transfer of Mines Inspectors, more particularly of petitioner and respondent No. 5 hence...
Tag this Judgment!Nand Kishore Sharma and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-20-2000
M.L. Visa, J.1. Petitioners have filed this application for quashing the FIR of Konch PS Case No. 28 of 1989 under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act (Annexure-3).2. The case of the petitioners is that Konch PS Case No. 28/89 was registered against unknown and the police after investigation has submitted charge-sheet No. 11/95 dated 31.5.1995 under Sections 342/302/34/109/201 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act against the petitioners (Annexure-3/1) but cognizance has not been taken by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya, where the case is still pending because of want of sanction by the State Government against the petitioners.3. Earned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has submitted that in the charge-sheet (Annexure-3/1), the I.O. has stated that an application has been sent to Superintendent of Police, C.I.D. (C), Patna through proper channel for according sanction from the State Government but the sanction has not yet bee...
Tag this Judgment!S.W. Palanitkar and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-20-2000
B.N. Singh 'Neelam', J.1. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code) is so filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 6.1.98 so passed in Complaint Case No. 1388/97 preferred by one Raghunath Prasad, figuring here as Opp. Party No. 2, in which the learned Court below, as detailed in the impugned order, a copy of which is filed, finding prime facie material has taken cognizance of the offence against the accused-petitioners under Sections 406 and 420/120B of the Indian Penal Code issuing summons against the petitioners under the provisions of Section 204 of the Code.2. By going through the complaint, petition, a copy of which is filed marked as Annexure-1, in a nut shell the allegations so put against the present petitioners are that the accused-persons are concerned with M/s. Gujarat Fertilizers and Chemicals Ltd., in short hereinafter to be referred as GSFC and Opp. Party No. 2 was so appointed as C & S (consignment Stockiest) ...
Tag this Judgment!Bata India Ltd. and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-19-2000
S.K. Katriar, J. 1. This writ petition has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned orders dated July 8, 1988 (Annexure 1), issued by the respondent-authorities to petitioner Nos. 3 to 5, and dated August 25, 1988 (Annexure 2), from the respondent-authorities to petitioner Nos. I and 2. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are engaged in the manufacture and sale of footwear, and petitioner Nos. 3 to 5 are contractors who provide labourers to the former. 2. Petitioner No. 1 is a public limited company having its registered office at Calcutta and one of its factories is at Mokama. Petitioner No. 2 is a functionary of the company at Mokama, Petitioner Nos. 3 to 5 are contractors who supply labourers to petitioner Nos. 1 and. 2 for the Mokama unit. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were initially governed by the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and the Employees' Provident Fund Scheme, 1952 (hereinafter refer...
Tag this Judgment!Yogendra Prasad Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-19-2000
M.L. Visa, J.1. Heard earned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Respondent No. 4 has not appeared in spite of service of notice.2. With the consent of the parties, the matter is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.3. This writ application has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of an appropriate writ or writs commanding the respondents and asking them as to why respondent No. 4 has been released from jail custody without completion of sentence passed against him and directing the respondents to take respondent No. 4 in custody for the remaining period of his sentences.4. The facts, in brief, of the matter giving rise to this application are that Triveni Singh (respondent No. 4) was an accused in Dhanarua P.S. Case No. 63 of 1988 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of Arms Act (Annexure-1) in which after investigation charge-sheet against respondent No. 4 and others was submitted and after trial seve...
Tag this Judgment!Kailash Prasad Gupta Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-19-2000
Prabhat Kumar Sinha, J.1. This application is directed against the order dated 14.7.1998 passed by Shri Indu Bhusan Prasad, Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Biharsharif at Nalanda in Maintenance Case No. 41 (M) 1995 whereas and where-under the learned Magistrate, on consideration of the materials on record in an application filed by Ranju Gupta and her minor daughter Ekta Kumari under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code', in short) had allowed the same directing the present petitioner, claimed to be the husband of Smt. Ranju Gupta, to pay monthly allowance Rs. 400 to the applicant, wife, from the date of the application and a monthly allowance of Rs. 300 to the minor daughter, Ekta Kumari, @ Heena w.e.f. 14.7.1998, the date of the order.2. In the impugned order, the learned lower Court had held that Ranju Gupta was wife of he petitioner Kailash Prasad Gupta and during their wedlock, minor girl Ekta Kumari was born. This position has not been disputed by eit...
Tag this Judgment!Branch Manager, Bihar State Financial Corporation Vs. State of Bihar a ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-18-2000
Indu Prabha Singh, J.1. This is an application filed under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'the Code'). It is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.5.1998 passed by Shri Shahid Raus, 1st Class, Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in G.R. Case No. 1311 of 1995/T.R. No. 350 of 1998, by which the learned Magistrate acquitted opposite Party No. 2 of the charge under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code and set him at liberty.2. It appears that on the basis of a written report given by the Branch Manager of Gaya Branch of Bihar State Financial Corporation (in short 'the Corporation') an FIR was drawn up vide M.U. Police Case No. 22/95 under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code against opposite party No. 2 Md. Khalil the proprietor of M/s Magadh Plastic Industries, Pariya, Bodh Gaya. The allegation against-him was that even when he had mortgaged the plant and machinery of his factory in favour of the Corporation, he removed the same and thereby he com...
Tag this Judgment!Shambhu Prasad Mandal and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-18-2000
M.L. Visa, J.1. Heard the earned Counsel for the parties. With the consent of the parties, this matter is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.2. This application by the petitioners has been filed for quashing order dated 8.1.98 passed by ACJM, Sheikhpura in Complaint Case No. 165 (C) of 1996 by which he has recalled his earlier order dated 30.7.97.3. The facts, in brief, giving rise to this application are that opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 jointly filed a complaint which was numbered as Complaint Case No. 165 (C) of 1996, -before the Court of ACJM, Sheikhpura against the petitioners and some others alleging therein that the petitioners who held different posts in a company named as Memorial Finance and Investment (I) Ltd. called a meeting inviting general public canvassing and causing the public to believe that investment by general public in the aforesaid company would be paid with attractive interest and they would also be given facility of grant of loan. Opposite party N...
Tag this Judgment!Arbind Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-18-2000
Sachchidanand Jha, J.1. These two writ petitions making similar grievance and on same facts have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. There are ten petitioners in all. They seek direction upon the respondents to appoint them on Class III posts on compassionate ground as per their qualification. They have already been offered appointment on Class IV posts.2. The grievance of the petitioners is that though they possess the requisite qualification for appointment to Class III posts they have been offered appointment on Class IV posts on the basis of competitive test. It is said that the circulars of the State Government regarding compassionate appointment do not envisage holding of any competitive test. It has been urged that in any case if the respondents wanted to hold any competitive test, they should have informed the petitioners and given opportunity to prepare them for such test.3. The nature and scope of compassionate appointment has been subject-mat...
Tag this Judgment!Munna Choudhary Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-15-2000
Prabhat Kumar Sinha, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment recorded in Sessions Trial No. 244 of 1997/08 of 1997 where under the IInd Additional Sessions Judge at Aurangabad had found the appellant guilty under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code ('the Code', in short) and had sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years while acquitting other accused-persons.2. The short argument of the earned Counsel for the appellant is that the appellant with two others was charged under Sections 304B and 201 of the Code but in the judgment the learned trial Court did not find the charges to have been proved but came to the conclusion that the offence was proved under Section 306 of the Code so much so that the appellant, the husband of deceased, could be said to have abetted commission of suicide by his wife for demanding Rs. 2,000/- which, as allegation goes, the brother of the deceased had taken from the husband side for depositing in a Peerless policy but had not so...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »