Patna Court December 2004 Judgments
ish. Md. Mian @ Ishmohamad Mian and anr. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-08-2004
Mridula Mishra, J.1. Both the appeals arise out of one and the same judgment and order dated 8th August, 2001 passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, West Champaran, Bettiah, in Sessions Trial No. 494 of 1997 arising out of Sikarpur P.S. Case No. 89 of 1997. Hence, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The appellants have been convicted and sentenced for life imprisonment under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Prosecution case based on the fardbeyan of Sattar Ansari, (PW 5) recorded by the S.I. of Sikarpur Police Station on 18th June, 1997 at about 1 p.m. is that on 17th June, 1997 at about 4 p.m. his brother Bikhi Mian had cut away branches of bamboo belonging to Ish Mohamad Mian as branches had covered as shed over Barhar, Kadam and Sarifa trees belonging to the informant. At about 7-30 p.m. Ish Mohamad Mian asked Sattar Ansari (PW 5) from his darwaja as to why he had cut away the branches of bamboo trees upon which Sattar Ansari ...
Tag this Judgment!Kariman Prajapati @ Kariman Kumhar Vs. Chhaichhu Mahto @ Chhachhu Math ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-07-2004
S.N. Hussain, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. This civil revision arises out of title suit No. 50/1987 (46/1988) in which the plaintiff-decreeholder (opposite party No. 1) sought the reliefs of declaration of title and confirmation of possession and also for an injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and in the alternative recovery of possession if the plaintiff is found to be dis-possessed by the defendants during the pendency of the suit. The said suit was decreed on 7.5.1990 and the title of the plaintiff was declared and his possession was confirmed and the defendants were restrained from interfering with the plaintiff's possession. Against the said decree the defendants filed title appeal No. 7/1993 which was dismissed on 19.5.1995, which was never challenged. However, much later the plaintiff-decreeholder filed Execution Case No. 6/1999 (Annexure-2) for two reliefs, namely, (i) recovery of cost and (ii) arrest and dete...
Tag this Judgment!Bhola Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-07-2004
M.L. Visa, J.1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 21-12-1987 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patna at Barh, in Sessions Trial No. 131 of 1984 convicting and sentencing all the four appellants to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, IPC) and further convicting and sentencing the appellant Bhola Singh to undergo R.I. for two years under Section 324, IPC but both the sentences against appellant Bhola Singh directing to run concurrently, all the four appellants in this appeal have challenged the judgment and order of their conviction and sentences.2. The case of prosecution, briefly stated, is that on 17-12-1981, at about 5 p.m. deceased Shashi Bhushan Singh alias Lugan, younger son of informant. Harbansh Singh (PW-5), went to verandah of his Bungala (a sitting place) to tether his cattle. At that time, all the appellants who were sitting in the flour mill of appellant Bhola Singh, who is cousin of informant, situat...
Tag this Judgment!Jaiya Rai and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-06-2004
Mridula Mishra, J.1. Nine appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 1.12.2001 passed by the Illrd-Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi, in Sessions Trial No. 304 of 1995/106 of 2000. Appellant No. 1 Jaiya Rai has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2000/-. In default of payment of fine R.I. for one year. He has further been convicted under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to R.I. for two years. Appellant Nos. 2 to 9 have been convicted under Sections 302 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life as well as fine of Rs. 2000/-. In default of payment of fine, R.I. for one year. They have also been convicted under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for one year. . . .2. Fardbeyan of the informant Nagendra Rai (PW 2) was recorded by the Sub-inspector of Dumra Police Station on 19.3.199...
Tag this Judgment!Mahfooz Ahmed @ Mahfooz Alam Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-06-2004
P.K. Sinha, J.1. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code' in short) is for quashing order dated 10.5.2002 recorded by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai whereby and whereunder the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai took cognizance of offence against the petitioner, on submissions of the charge-sheet, under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The only ground that was pressed into service was that the FIR in the case, vide Annexure-1, was lodged against the petitioner as well against Binod Kumar Sinha, both Nazirs at Bhagwanpur Block, for criminal breach of trust for various amounts. It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that Binod Kumar Sinha, who also faced departmental proceeding, when he deposited the amount alleged to have been misappropriated by him, the District Magistrate, Begusarai issued order communicated by the Deputy Collector (Establishment) (Annexure-8), recorded on an application filed by Binod ...
Tag this Judgment!Ranjay Kumar Choudhary and anr. Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-06-2004
Manohar Lal Visa, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 22-12-2000 and order dated 2-1-2001 passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Khagaria in Sessions Trial No. 164 of 1997 convicting and sentencing both the appellants to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each and in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year each under Sections 302/34 of Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and to undergo imprisonment for life under Sections 376/34 of IPC. Both the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.2. The case of prosecution, in short, as stated in Fard-e-bayan of informant Upendra Thakur (PW. 7), is that informant had grown maize and peas crops in one bigha of land in Gaura Gopi Bahiyar and one week before recording his Fard-e-bayan. he had raised a Bathan in which he used to keep his buffaloes and remained sitting there for day and night to look after his field and his both deceased daughters Bichiya Kumari aged about...
Tag this Judgment!Shashi Kant Paswan Vs. State and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-03-2004
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.2. The present writ application assails the order of dismissal dated 3.7.1996, Annexure-16. in view of the factual position emerging during course of argument it is not necessary to discuss the facts of the case in detail. Suffice it to say that by order dated 5.11.2004, respondents were directed to make available the order-sheet of the departmental proceedings to demonstrate that the petitioner had been given due intimation and had knowledge of the dates fixed in the enquiry, or that he duly participated in the same.3.. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made specific submission that after the petitioner submitted his show cause to the memo of charges on 13.5.1994, he was not communicated the dates to be fixed in the enquiry. It was further submitted that the records would reveal that in this case no notices were issued to the petitioner with regard to the dates fixed for ...
Tag this Judgment!Prem Ram and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-03-2004
V.N. Sinha, J. 1. There are 13 petitioners, out of them, petitioner Nos. 1 to 3, 7 to 10, 12 and 13 were engaged in the Bihar Secretariat Canteen, Patna as Class IV daily rated wage earners before 1.8.1985 in August 1984, March 1983, April 1985, January 1985, June 1983, April 1982, January, 1985, January 1979. Petitioner Nos. 4 to 6 and 11 were engaged in the said canteen thereafter in between 1986-87 in January 1987, August 1986. May 1987 respectively, as would appear from the notice dated 21.5.1990 issued under the signature of Deputy Labour Commissioner, Bihar, Patna, as contained in Annexure-3. They assail the order, bearing Memo. No. 3095 dated 23.10.2003 and another office order bearing Memo. No. 3133 dated 29.10.2003, as contained in Annexures 1 and 2, whereunder Secretary/Deputy Secretary, Labour Employment and Training Department has held that the petitioner Nos. 2 to 7 are not entitled to any preference in the matter of regular appointment in the Bihar Secretariat Canteen in...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Dayaloo Sharma Vs. State and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-03-2004
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.2. In the present application, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 10.5.1999, Annexure-1, by which the order dated 2.9.1995 retiring the petitioner from service with effect from 1.9.1995 has been upheld. The petitioner had come to this Court earlier in CWJC No. 595 of 1997 which was disposed of on 30.11.1998 with a direction to the respondents to hold an enquiry afresh and then pass appropriate orders, in pursuance of which Annexure-1 came to be issued. In the aforesaid order, this Court had also observed that whether the petitioner would retire on 1.9.1995 or whether he would be deemed to continue in service till 31.12.1997 and would be, therefore, entitled to his salary till that date would abide by the final decision.3. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Naik Instructor in the Bihar Homeguards on 18.10.1963 when his service book was also open...
Tag this Judgment!Anwar Ahmad Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-02-2004
Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner seeks direction upon the respondents to grant him the benefit of crossing of efficiency bar with effect from 21.8.1986 and to grant him first time bound promotion with effect from 21.7.1991 and to pay him all the consequential monetary benefits.3. It is submitted by learned counsel-for the petitioner that though the petitioner was eligible for the benefits of crossing of the efficiency bar and he was eligible for first time bound promotion, benefits were not given to him with effect from the due date, as claimed by him. It is further submitted that in this regard, the petitioner has filed his representation bringing out a case or discrimination, but till date the same has not been disposed of.4. No counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. In absence of counter affidavit, it would not be appropriate for this Court to issue any positive direction for redressal of grievances of the petitioner.5. Howev...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »