Patna Court February 2006 Judgments

R.A. Chowdhury Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Patna

Reported in: (2006)(3)SLJ82CAT

1. The appliant who was working as Assistant (G), C.F.R.I. under C.S.R.I. was, as claimed, involved in a private complaint alleging some theft and was taken into custody by Police on 10.2.1995. It is not disputed that he was released on bail on 17.5.1995 under orders of a Court. The matter thereafter having come to the notice of the authorities, an order was issued dated 27.3.1995 at Annxure-A/1 under Sub-rule (2) of Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1965 Rules"), was ordered to be deemed to have been suspended with effect from 10.2.1995, further directing that he would remain under suspension until further orders.2. While so remaining under suspension even after his release on bail, the applicant superannuated from service with effect from 31.1.1998, while he was being paid only suspension allowance as per rules. After retirement, he was paid provisional pension vide order dated 8.7.1998.The applica...

Mannu Lal Sharma Alias Mannu Mistry Vs. State of Bihar and anr.

Court: Patna

Rekha Kumari, J.1. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing the order dated 15-10-2001 passed by Shri D. M. Pandey, J. M., Patna in complaint Case No. 1785(C) of 2000 by which he has issued summons against the petitioner and his father and two brothers (who are accused Nos. 1 to 4 in the complaint petition) for standing trial under Sections 341, 323, 380, 427, 448 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Heard.3. The prosecution case, in nut-shell, is that the grand father of the complainant (opposite party No. 2) had purchased seven decimal of land out of 14 decimal ofland of plot No. 290 on 25-4 1949. Subsequently the petitioner and his father purchased the said plot on 14-8-1994. The petitioner and his father then filed title suit for declaration of their title and recovery of possession. The suit was dismissed. They filed appeal in the High Court which was allowed in part and their right title was declared over 1 katha 4 dhoors...

Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shiv NaraIn Sahani and ors.

Court: Patna

J.N. Bhatt, C.J.1. After having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances as well as, the ratio propounded in the decision rendered in the case of Nagappa v. Gurudayal Singh : AIR2003SC674 , the amendment petition filed on behalf of the respondent No. 1, on the analogous principles of the provisions of Order 6, Rule 17 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, it shall stand allowed.2. By this appeal, the appellant Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. has assailed the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-Second Additional District Judge, Darbhanga in Claim Case No. 15 of 1995, dated 31.1.2002, whereby the claim petition came to be granted and an amount of Rs. 2,68,200 with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the application till payment by way of compensation for the premature demise of the wife of the original claimant, respondent No. 1 herein, was awarded ...

Nagendra Prasad Singh and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and anr.

Court: Patna

Rekha Kumari, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the order dated 17.8.2004 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge XI, Patna in Cr. Revision No. 295/2004 and its consequential order dated 1.12.2004 passed by Mr. Manoj Kumar No. 1I, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna in Complaint Case No. 2220(C) of 2003 where cognizance under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (N.I. Act) and Section 420 IPC has been taken against the petitioners.2. Heard.3. The prosecution case in the complaint petition filed by the complainant (O.P. No. 2) in short is that the complaint Institute of Entrepreneurship Development (ED), Bihar is a registered society and dealing with the scheme of Computer Education, studies and its expansion among the young generation. Accused No. 1 M/s. Aryabhatt Computer is a registered society of which accused Nos. 2 and 3 (petitioner Nos. 1 and 2) are the Chairman and the Secretary respectively. They are engaged in c...

Joyakesh Podder and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and anr.

Court: Patna

I.P. Singh, J. 1. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 2-1-2006 passed in Criminal Complaint No. 219(C) 04 filed by petitioners under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'the Code') has been rejected by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patna.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner No. 1 is the Commercial Manager, M/s. Reliance Infocom Ltd. having address 5th Floor, Reliance House, 34, JL Nehru Road, Kolkata 700071 (West Bengal) and is posted at Kolkata. As he is Commercial Manager of the aforesaid company, the petitioner looks after all commercial functions in West Bengal circle.3. It has been further submitted that petitioner No. 2 is the Senior Manager Sales, Reliance Telecom Limited, 2nd Floor, Ravi Bhavan, Jai Stambh Chowk. PO: Raipur (Chattisgarh) and is posted at Raipur in Chattisgarh. As he is Senior Manager Sales the petitioner looks after the Mobile Prepaid sales within the territory of Chattisg...

Satyendra Sinha Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

Reported in: 2006CriLJ1478

1. By this "habeas corpus" petition, by invocation of the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner detenu has questioned legality and ; validity of the detention order contained in memo No. 466, recorded on 29-4-2005 (Annexure-1), by the District Magistrate, Patna, invoking his powers under Sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981 (in short "the Act of 1981") and the final order (Annexure-5 series), recorded on 6-6-2005, by the State of Bihar, under the powers conferred by Section 21(1) read with Section 22 of the Act of 1981, whereby, the petitioner has been directed to remain in detention till 29 4-2006.2. Mr. Vindhykeshari Kumar, learned Sr. Advocate, appearing for the petitioner, and Mr. Shashi Bhushan, for the State have offered their submissions. In course of submissions, they have taken us through the factual profile and the impugned orders. We have also considered the relevant provisions of the Act of 1981 for the purp...

Abdul Rahman Khan Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

Barin Ghosh, J.1. Upon a chargesheet dated 3rd March, 2000 followed by a reply thereto and subsequent enquiry, the petitioner has been compulsorily retired from his services by the Impugned order. An appeal preferred against that order has yielded no result. The petitioner then filed a memorial that has also been rejected. The petitioner was a Sub Inspector of Police. He was attached with the Bhagalpur Police when he was relieved on 4th January, 2000 for joining the Muzaffarpur Police. The petitioner, the charge says, despite being relieved did not return his service revolver with the Bhagalpur Police administration. Admittedly the petitioner returned the same on 11th July, 2001 although he was chargesheeted on 3rd March, 2000 for unauthorisedly keeping the said service revolver. These facts were undisputed.2. The petitioner sought to rely upon an order dated 29th January, 2000 passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police staying the relieving order of the petitioner. No attempt w...

Nand Kishore Prasad Sinha Vs. State of Bihar

Court: Patna

Rekha Kumari, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the order dated 15-5-2001 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda in Silao P. S. Case No. 328/2000 by which he has take cognizance under Sections 420, 467, 468. 471, 120B, IPC and ordered to issue summons against the petitioner.2. Heard.3. It appears that the petitioner filed a petition on 16-5-2000 before the D.C.L.R., Rajgir stating therein that the ex-landlord has settled a land measuring 42.50 acre of Mauza Ujarpur, Khata No. 44 Plot No. 570 through Hukumnama in the name of his father Nanda Mahto on 2-11-1932. The Ex-landlord thereafter issued rent receipts in the name of his father. After vesting of Jamindari, return was filed in his father's name, and accordingly his father's name was entered into Register II. The Anchal Adhikari then after receipt of the rent granted rent receipts in the name of his father. After the death of his father the petitioner was granted ...

Sukhdeo Paswan Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.

Court: Patna

J.N. Bhatt, C.J.1. By this appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the appellant original claimant challenged the amount of compensation awarded by the First Additional District Judge-cum-Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Khagaria in Claim Case No. 27 of 1996, by a judgment recorded on 29.1.2002, whereby, an unfortunate father, appellant-claimant, came to be awarded a grossly inadequate amount of Rs. 52,000 only by way of compensation.2. Upon a joint request of the parties and considering the urgency of the matter, the appeal has been taken up for final hearing today itself.3. The following aspects have remained uncontroverted from the record which may be highlighted at the outset:(1) That the original claimant is an unfortunate father who lost his minor son on account of vehicular accident which occurred on 20.4.1996.(2) The deceased son Kabir Gandhi was aged about 12 years as per the pleadings who was standing by the side of the road and on account of ras...