Patna Court May 2001 Judgments
Ram Deo Paswan Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2001
A.K. Sinha, J.1. This revision application has been directed against the judgment passed in Criminal Appeal No. 32 of 1998 by 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Munger by which he confirmed the order of conviction and sentence of the petitioner under Section 498(A) of the I.P.C. who was convicted by the trial Court Section 498(A) of the I.P.C. along with four other accused persons and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 12 months. The learned appellate Court, however, acquitted four persons who are in-laws but maintained the conviction of the petitioner who happened to be the husband of the complainant.2. The complainant Pratima Devi filed a case against her husband and in-laws under Sections 323, 379 and 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code alleging therein that her husband and in-laws used to demand Rs. 25,000 as dowry and due to non-fulfilment of the demand they used to assault and torture her and she was driven out by her husband.3. It is true that there is finding of facts ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramswaroop Tanti Vs. Sadanand Alias Sadho Sharma
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2001
S.N. Pathak, J.1. This Second Appeal has been preferred against the judgment of the 1st Appellate Court passed by the Sub-Judge, Khagaria, in Title Appeal No. 9 of 1984 whereby the learned Sub-Judge set aside the judgment of the trial Court passed in Title Suit No. 10 of 1983 dismissing the same.2. The case of the plaintiff-respondent in the lower Court was that a piece of land bearing plot No. 156 in khata No. 138 was taken settlement from the ex-landlord by one Makhan Tanti. This Makhan Tanti had no male issue although he had only daughter, namely, Bahuri Devi. So, the land measuring 6 kathas was sold by Makhan Tanti to his only daughter Bahuri Devi by registered sale-deed dated 14-12-1962. Bahuri Devi came in possession of the land, but she died leaving behind her son Sadanand Sharma, a plaintiff of the suit. Sadanand Sharma incurred some loan while performing Shradha ceremony of his mother. The plaintiffs father also died. So, Makhan Tanti under whose guardianship the plaintiff wa...
Tag this Judgment!Vijaya Shankar Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: May-11-2001
A.N. Chaturvedi, President: 1. This appeal by the complainant is directed against an order dated 31.10.1996 passed by District Forum, Gaya, in Case No. 2 of 1995 whereby the complaint filed by the complainant (appellant) was dismissed. 2. The case of the complainant (appellant) is that he being an educated unemployed decided to purchase an auto-ricksha for earning his livelihood. For this purpose he obtained a loan of Rs. 24,500/- in April, 1987 from the opposite party under banks scheme of loan to unemployed youth and executed an agreement for the same. As per the term of agreement, the loan amount was repayable in sixty monthly instalments of Rs. 500/- commencing from October, 1987 with interest @ 12% with effect from 23.4.1987. There were defaults in payment of instalments. Under the circumstances his (complainants) father under his letter dated 29.9.1987 advised the opposite party to credit to the loan account quarterly a sum of Rs. 687.50 paise which was accruing as interest on hi...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Nandan Prasad Sinha Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-09-2001
Sachchidanand Jha, J.1. A short but significant question of law is involved in this letters patent appeal. The question relates to the procedure meant to be followed in conducting proceeding under Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules.2. The petitioner is a retired Government servant. He superannuated from the post of Head Accountant, Purnea Treasury on 31-12-1990. On 24-11-1992 he was served with a notice seeking explanation on certain points relating to provident fund withdrawals by some officers/employees of the Irrigation Department. Earlier, Khazanchi Hat P.S. Case No. 149/91 (State v. Devendra Prasad Srivastava) had been instituted by the Treasury Officer, Purnea in which the petitioner was not named as an accused. In the charge-sheet too, he did not figure. On 8-12-1992 the petitioner submitted his explanation. On 14-5-1993 he was informed by the Director of Treasuries that inquiry was proposed to be held under Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules (in short, 'the Pension Rules...
Tag this Judgment!Keshar Paswan @ Ram Bachu Paswan and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-07-2001
Indu Prabha Singh, J.1. All the appellants have been convicted under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that an application was filed by the informant, Uma Shankar Sah stating therein that when on 22-6-1984 he came back from U.P. his wife informed him that on last Saturday while his daughter was working on machine, at noon the appellants along with Toofani Ram, Baldan, Dukhbhajan Ram, Keshwar Ram enticed her daughter and took her to Ramgarh Bazar and from there it was alleged that they took her to somewhere else by Bus. It was further alleged that his father, Narayan Sah saw them taking Prabha Kumari with them. It was further alleged that his father thought that Prabha was going for marketing with the culprits. Other co-villagers, namely, Ram Surat Singh and Tribent also saw them taking the victim girl with them. Further case of informant was that when he asked from Bachu Ram an...
Tag this Judgment!Jainu Dhunia Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-07-2001
Ashok Kumar Verma, J.1. The sole appellant has filed this appeal against the judgment and order dated 17th June, 1987, passed by the Xth Additional Sessions Judge, Patna in Session Trial No. 713 of 1986, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted the accused-appellant under Sections 376 and 366A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for life under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for ten years under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code. The sentences are to run concurrently.2. In short the case of the prosecution is that on 22nd March, 1985 at about 10 a.m. Geeta Kumari aged about 14 years, daughter of the informant had gone to her school and when she did not return from the school her father, who is informant of this case, went in search of her and at Neora Railway Station, a boy, son of one Bihta Rai told him that he had seen a girl with Jainu Dhunia at the Railway Station at about 12'O clock in the day. Accused, Jainu Dhun'ra was ...
Tag this Judgment!Nathuni Yadav Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-07-2001
A.K. Sinha, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Buxar in sessions trial No. 65 of 1992, whereby and whereunder, he convicted the sole appellant under Section 302, of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.2. In short, the prosecution case is that on 23-2-1991 the informant's brother Ram Chhabila Yadav, Mukhia, was returning from block office after attending some meeting along with the appellant who happened to be his brother-in-law. When they reached near the house of Bharosa Mushar, the appellant is alleged to have took out a sharp edged 'Kutta' which he was hiding under the 'Chadar' worn by him and started assaulting the deceased with that 'Kutta'causing injuries on his neck, cheek, chest and below the eye. The informant was going to take tea in the shop and he saw the occurrence. Saral Yadav, Choukidar also witnessed the occurrence. The motive behind th...
Tag this Judgment!The C.B.i. (A.H.D.) Vs. Braj Bhushan Prasad and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-04-2001
Aftab Alam, J.1. These two proceedings before the Full Bench are on reference made under Section 89(2) of the Bihar Re-organisation Act, 2000. The object of the reference is to determine whether by virtue of Section 89(1) of the Act the criminal cases, commonly known as the Animal Husbandry Scam cases, stand transferred to the Court in Jharkhand, the newly-created State of Jharkhand, or whether those cases would continue to proceed before the Special Court at Patna where they were instituted and where they have been hitherto proceeding. According to Section 89(1) of the Act upon the creation of the State of Jharkhand, every proceeding pending before a Court in this State shall stand transferred to the corresponding Court in Jharkhand if it is a proceeding relating exclusively to the territory of Jharkhand. Subsection (2) of Section 89 provides that if a question arises as to whether any proceeding should stand transferred under Sub-section (1), it would be referred to the Patna High C...
Tag this Judgment!Sahraj Yadav and ors. Vs. State of Bihar.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-03-2001
Indu Prabha Singh and Ashok Kumar Verma, JJ.1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order, dated 18th June, 1987, passed by 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Arrah, in Sessions Trial No. 359 of 1985, by which all the appellants have been convicted under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. Appellants Mutur Yadav and Bhurha Yadav have further been convicted under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. The rest of the appellants have further been convicted under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 05-11-1984 at 09.00 a.m. the informant's brother Choudhary Yadav (deceased) started from his house for Arrah in connection of his case pending there and when he had reached east of his village and west to the house...
Tag this Judgment!Sital Ram Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-03-2001
Radha Mohan Prasad, J.1. Keeping in view the general direction of this Court with respect to the claim relating to post-retiral dues, as agreed, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of the general direction of this Court given in the case of Mostt. Rukmini Devi v. The State of Bihar reported in 1996(2) PLJR 348, read with another general direction of this Court given in the case of Dr. Ganganand Jha v. The Lalit Narayan Mithila University and Ors. reported in 1997(1) BLJ 93.2. The petitioner may file his claim in detail before the authority concerned along with a copy of this order and the aforementioned general directions of this Court which shall be considered and disposed of by the said authority strictly in terms of the said general directions and within the time fixed therein, failing which the concerned authority shall not draw his salary and other allowances and shall also be li,able to pay a cost of Rs. 1,000 (one thousand) to the petitioner from his own pocket....
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »