Patna Court February 2002 Judgments
Manoj Sahay and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-08-2002
1. In all the twenty writ applications, since common questions of law are involved, they have been heard together and are being disposed by this order.2. The writ petitioners in all the cases are owners of the motor vehicles, namely, trucks, mini-bus, tanker etc. They are aggrieved by the seizure of their vehicles by the authorities of the State of Bihar on the ground of non-payment of taxes under the Bihar Motor Vehicle Taxation Act (for short 'the Act') as well as for violation of the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the M. V. Act' for not possessing ownerbook, route permit, insurance certificate etc.3. The petitioners of C.W.J.C. Nos. 14613 of 2001, 15014/1991, 15543/2001, 15614/ 2001, 15633/2001, 15825/2001, 15859/ 2001, 15920/2001, 129/2002, 131/2002, 225/2002, 415/2002 and 503/2002 have the permits granted by the Transport Authorities of the erstwhile State of Bihar and they are still valid.4. The petitioners of C.W.J.C. Nos. 14981/2001 and 15730...
Tag this Judgment!Bhubneshwar Lal Das Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-08-2002
S.N. Pathak, J.1. This revision is directed against the judgment dated 6-9-2000 passed by 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Darbhanga in Criminal Appeal No. 94/94. Revisionist was convicted by the trial Court for the offence under Sections 147,148, 323 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo SI for 2 years for the offence under Section 326, IPC, 1 year SI for the offence under Sections 147 and 148, IPC and 6 months SI for the offence under Section 323, IPC. However, the appellate Court acquitted the revisionist under Sections 147 and 323, IPC a id upheld the sentence passed against the revisionist under Sections 148 and 326, IPC.2. It has been submitted by the revisionist's lawyer that the injury sustained by the petitioner is only on the ankle. So perhaps, there was chance of sustaining his injury somewhere else or in some other manner. However, his contention cannot be taken on its face value as both the Courts below have given a current finding that the injuries were caus...
Tag this Judgment!Renuka Rai Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-08-2002
R.N. Prasad, J.1. The petitioner is wife of Shri Chandra Mauli Mishra. He was employee of the State Government. He was posted as Private Assistant to Special Secretary Vigilance. According to learned Counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner with her husband was living in Government Flat No. 55/800, Shashtri Nagar. Her husband is traceless with effect from 7-5-1994. In spite of best efforts he could not be traced out and as such writ petition has been filed for issue of direction to allow legal benefits of her husband to her and allow her to live in the said flat till payment of legal dues.2. From the averment made in the writ petition it is evident that husband of petitioner, who was employee of the State Government, is traceless with effect from 7-5-1994. Information to the aforesaid effect was given to Shashtri nagar Police Station. The report of Officer-in-charge of Shashtri Nagar Police Station has also been annexed as Annexure-9 to the supplementary affidavit. Learned Counsel ...
Tag this Judgment!Aditya Narayan Singh Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-07-2002
S.N. Pathak, J.1. This revision is directed against the judgment dated 6 -7-2000 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge VI, Munger in Cr. Appeal No. 175/98, confirming the judgment of conviction recorded by the trial Court i.e. Railway, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Kieul in RPF Jhajha 2 (3) 87 trial No. 261/98. The revisionist was convicted for the offence under Section 3(a) of Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act. He was sentenced to undergo Rl for one year. The appellant Court converted it into a sentence of fine and he was directed to pay Rs. 3,000 and in default to undergo 3 months SI.2. The revisionist was prosecuted for having 8 tonnes of coal in which was mixed 40% of steam coal which belonged to the Railway., The house of the revisionist was searched on a search warrant issued from the Railway Magistrate and the aforesaid seizure was made and seizure list was prepared and the revisionist was prosecuted and on trial, he was convicted and sentenced.3. It has been submitted tha...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Shamim Alam Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-07-2002
R.N. Prasad, J.1. The petitioner is on the post of State Examiner on Finger Prints. Respondent No. 6 was Director. He retired on 30.11.2001. While he was retiring he handed overcharge of Director to Respondent No. 7 According to learned Counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was the senior most and as such charge should have been handed over to him but it was not done with mala-fide motive. More over, in the writ petition grievance has been made for appointment of permanent Director. Rule 457B of the Bihar Police Manual says that (a) In Finger Prints Bureau, one Director and some experts shall be appointed. Apart from them, ministerial and fourth grade employees shall also be posted but they shall be a part of the C.I.D. (b) The appointment of Director shall be done by selection from experts and its orders shall be issued by the Government on the recommendation of I.G's selection board. The I.G's board may also recommend direct recruitment through the Public Service Commission if ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhupendra Prasad Yadav Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-07-2002
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad, J.1. This revision application is directed against the order dated 8-5-2000 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa in Misc. Case No. 87/98 (Trial No. 700 of 2000), whereby, in exercise of its power under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the learned Magistrate had granted maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500 per month to opposite party No. 2.2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts given rise to the present application, are that opposite party No. 2 Renu Kumari filed an application for grant of maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code'). On 1-8-1998 show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner and in pursuance thereof, he appeared on 31 -8-1998 and prayed for time to file the show cause. Said prayer of the petitioner was accepted and case was adjourned to 23-9-1998. On 23-13-1998, petitioner did not appear and the learned Magistrate directed the case to be listed for ex parte hear...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Ejaz Anjum Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-07-2002
1. The appellant-petitioner Md. Ejaz Anjum filed CWJC. No. 1165 of 2002 claiming that he was as of right entitled to receive a job with the State of Bihar regard being had to the fact that his father died in 1995. At the time when the appellant-petitioner's father had died he was minor. He was 15 years old. When he applied for being considered for an appointment on Class IV post the respondents intimated him at the time when his father had died (a) he was minor and (b) his brother already possessed a Government job. In the circumstances, his candidature was not considered. Both these facts have been noticed by the learned judge while dismissing the petition. 2. The Court does not find any error in the order dated January 22, 2002 so impugned. Dismissed....
Tag this Judgment!Chandra Shekhar Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-06-2002
R.N. Prasad, J.1. The petitioner is member of Bihar Administrative Service. At the relevant time he was posted at Sonbersa on the post of Block Development Officer. In the year 1982 and subsequently he was posted at Kharagpur. In 1991 Vigilance P.S. Case N o. 48/92 was instituted while he was posted at Sonbersa. Kharagpur P.S. Case No. 17/91 was instituted while he was posted at Kharagpur. In the said case as yet no charge-sheet has been submitted. He filed a writ petition bearing C.W.J.C. No. 11032/2000 claiming promotion to junior and senior selection grade. The said writ petition was disposed of on 23-11 -2000 directing the respondent-Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department to pass appropriate order on the representation in accordance with law as early as possible. The said representation has been disposed of vide order contained in letter dated 3-10-2001, Annexure-6, whereby his claim for promotion has been kept pending and one post has been kept reserved but p...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Prakash Singh and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-06-2002
S.K. Katriar, J. 1. Heard Mr. Suresh Gandhi, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Mr. V.N. Sinha, learned G.P. 9 for respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 4, and Mr. S.K. Sinha, Senior Advocate, for respondent No. 3 (State Bank of India). 2. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 5.12.2001 (Annexure-3), passed by the learned Collector of Khagaria in Branch Manager, Suite Bank of India, Maheshkhut v. Vijay Keshri, Misc. Case No. 46/95-96, as well as Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Maheshkhut v. Shri Prakash Singh, Misc. Case No. 47/95-96, whereby he has allowed the review application of respondent No. 3 under Section 63 of the Public Demands Recovery Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The learned Collector has by the impugned order recalled his earlier order dated 23.5.1995 (Annexure-2), passed in State Bank of India v. Vijay Keshri, Misc. Case No. 7/95-96, and the order dated 23.5.1995, in S.B.I. v. Shri Prakash Singh, Misc. Case No. 8/95-96, passed under Section 60 ...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Mubarak Ali and anr. Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-06-2002
B.N.P. Singh, J.1. Though prosecution was launched also against Abdul Rauf along with the appellants but due to his absconsion from the proceeding, trial commenced only against Md. Mubarak Ali, Md. Sirajul, Haji Bhonu and Manzoor Hajam. All of them stood charged under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code and Mubarak Aii also stood charged under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial Court on appreciation of evidences placed on the record while acquitted Haji Bhonu and Manzoor Hajam, rendered verdict of guilt against Md. Mubarak Ali and Sirajul under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years. Md. Mubarak Ali also suffered conviction under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years with direction that sentences passed against the appellant Md. Mubarak Ali shall run concurrently.2. The accusation appearing from the written report of Fakirchand Chaudhary was ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »