Patna Court January 2007 Judgments
Kunti Devi, Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-31-2007
Navin Sinha, J.1. The petitioners are accused in Khagaul PS Case No. 11 of 2003 registered on 23.2.2003. Cognisance has been taken against them under Section 498A, 304B, 120B and other provisions of the Penal Code. The case has been committed to the Court of Sessions, Patna, registered as Sessions Trial No. 1022 of 2006 after commitment. The prayer in this application under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal procedure is for a direction for transfer of the Sessions Trial from Patna to the Sessions Court at Munger.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner urged that the deceased was married to petitioner No. 2 at Jamalpur in Munger. The alleged harassment and assault for purposes of dowry was made at Jamalpur. The deceased died at Jamalpur. The Post Mortem and cremation were also done at Jamalpur. On the admitted case of the prosecution no part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the Courts at Patna. Placing reliance upon Section 177 of the Code of Criminal...
Tag this Judgment!Kumar Sushil Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-31-2007
Ghanshyam Prasad, J.1. Heard.2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the criminal proceeding so far the petitioner is concerned in Sessions Trial No. 630 of 1988 pending in the court of Fast Track Court III, Patna.3. It appears from the record that on the basis of fardbeyan lodged by Executive Magistrate, Control Room, Patna on 31.3.1978, a case under Sections 147, 148, 307, 337, 338, 353, 188 and 153 alongwith other sections was registered by Kotwall P.S. against as many as 48 accused persons including this petitioner. This petitioner has been arrayed as accused No. 46. The petitioner made his appearance in the case just after institution of the case, but even after lapse of 29 years, the case has not yet been concluded.4. A report has been called for from the court below as to the stage of the Sessions Trial which is at flag 'A'. On perusal of the report, it appears that even charge has not yet been framed against this petitioner and other accused perso...
Tag this Judgment!Nirmal Kumar Pal and ors. Vs. the Joint Director of Consolidation and ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-31-2007
J.N. Bhatt, C.J.1. The challenge in this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India at the instance of the petitioners is against the order recorded, on 26.10.1987, by the Joint Director of Consolidation, Purnea, in Revision Case No. 2351 of 1985, affirming the order, passed by the Assistant Director, Consolidation, Saharsa, in Appeal No. 181 of 1983 dated 4.9.1985, reversing the order dated 24.6.1983 passed by the Consolidation Officer, Kishanpur in Case No. 299 of 1982, which was already dismissed by the Assistant Consolidation Officer, Kishanpur, in the same case.2. With a view to appreciate the merits of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, let there be narration of short facts, which are important and relevant to the issue:(i) Disputed land is homestead land over which the petitioners' house and sahan are standing since 1934, as it was built just after the earthquake in 1934, as averred by the petitioners;(ii) This house, obviously, w...
Tag this Judgment!Dwarik Rai and ors. Vs. the Joint Director of Consolidation and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-31-2007
J.N. Bhatt, C.J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioners have questioned the legality and validity of the order passed by the respondent Joint Director of Consolidation, Patna, in case No. 1576/86 dated 4.4.1988/12.5.1988, whereby, in revision, two earlier concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Consolidation Officer, dated 14.10.1985 and that by Deputy Director, Consolidation, dated 22.3.1986 in Appeal Case No. 948 of 1985-86 came to be reversed.2. The land in dispute relates to P.S.P. No. 1467 measuring an area of 17 decimals arising out of old khata No. 24 plot No. 220 which was recorded in the name of the grandfather of the petitioners. As per the case of the petitioners, at present, both the parties, i.e. the petitioners and respondent No. 4 are holding half each of the disputed land. The case of the petitioners has been that they are entitled to 2/3rd share as per the law, relying on the genealogy, which is articulated in paragraph 4 of the petition. The same is required to...
Tag this Judgment!Gautam Pandit Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-29-2007
V.N. Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the Respondents and the Intervener.2. Petitioner, who earlier served as clerk in the office of the District Mines Officer, Muzaffarpur, has filed this writ application for quashing the office order, bearing Memo. No. 115 dated 10.2.2005, Annexure-1, passed by the Joint Secretary, Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Bihar, Patna, whereunder he has been reverted to the post of peon on the ground that his appointment as clerk was made without undergoing any selection process and roster clearance and is void ab initio.3. Petitioner has assailed the impugned order on the ground that the Director, Mines under his Memo. No. 5418 dated 15.10.1993, Annexure-10A granted him first time bound promotion in the scale of Rs. 1320-2040/- on provisional basis in anticipation of the approval from the competent authority with further stipulation that in the event provisional time bound promotion is found erroneous then the amount paid...
Tag this Judgment!Laxman Mishra and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-29-2007
J.N. Bhatt, C.J.1. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners, adjoining owner of the land, have sought quashment of the arrange dated 21.1.1988, passed by Respondent No. 3, Additional Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna, in Case No. 106 of 1986 under Section 32 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (In short : the Act), which reversed the concurrent findings of facts of the two Revenue authorities, on the ground that the order passed in revision case is illegal and contrary to the factual findings.2. The petitioners are purchasers of the adjoining land measuring 27 decimals of land of Revisional Survey Plot No. 3900 by virtue of registered deed on 17.7.1984. The subject matter of litigation, which is also an agricultural property is situated near the boundary of the property purchased by the petitioners, which came to be purchased by respondent No. 5 by a deed on 2.1.1985.3. Being agg...
Tag this Judgment!Champa Mishra and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-29-2007
J.N. Bhatt, C.J.1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought the following reliefs:(i) to quash the order dated 30.11.1987 passed by the Joint Director, Consolidation, in Revision No. 3117 of 1984, contained in Annexure 5;(ii) to quash the order dated 15.10.1984 passed by the Deputy Director, Consolidation, Bhojpur in Appeal No. 50/81-82, contained in Annexure 4;(iii) to quash the order dated 20.7.1981 in Case No. 19 of 1979-80 passed by the Consolidation Officer, Nawanagar, contained in Annexure 3; and(iv) to direct the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to record R.S.P. 666 of Khata No. 19 measuring 22 decimals situated in village Ghorsari P.S. Navanagar, District Bhojpur in the name of the petitioners.2. It is very clear from the aforesaid reliefs that the petitioners have challenged the three concurrent orders on (Sic) of the Revenue authorities recorded on facts, in terms of the provisions of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prev...
Tag this Judgment!Bharath Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-29-2007
Ghanshyam Prasad, J.1. Heard.2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the order dated 7.8.2004 passed in Sessions Trial No. 80 of 2004 thereby and thereunder the application filed under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C. by opposite party has been allowed and they have been discharged.3. It appears from the record that originally on the basis of the complaint-cum-fardbeyan filed by the petitioner. Udwantnagar P.S. Case No. 86 of 2001 was registered against the opposite parties. However, after investigation, final report was submitted. Before submission of the final report. a protest petition was filed by the petitioner. The same was treated as complaint case and after enquiry under Section 202 Cr.P.C., cognizance under Sections 302/201 I.P.C. was taken against all the petitioner. Later on, the case was committed to the court of sessions and ultimately, it came before the learned Additional Sessions Judge for trial.4. The submission of the learned Counsel for the p...
Tag this Judgment!Haji Mir NaimuddIn Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-29-2007
J.N. Bhatt, C.J.1. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, erstwhile owner of the land, in question, has sought a direction against the respondents to make payment of the compensation amount to him in accordance with the approval already accorded by respondent No. 3, the then Additional Collector, Purnea, in Compensation Case No. 1018 of 1955-56 for the Khawati/Tauzi lands situated in Forbesganj., Araria Palasi and Sikty Anchals of the district which vested in the State of Bihar in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 (In short 'the Act').2. The second relief is sought for quashing the notices dated 21.3.1984 and 16.7.1986 by which the matter is being enquired afresh after inordinate delay, on the ground that reopening of the case cannot be done once the matter has been settled and disposed of for payment of compensation by order dated 14.2.1983, a copy of which has been produced as Annexure 5....
Tag this Judgment!Komal Tiwary Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-29-2007
S.K. Katriar and Kishore K. Mandal, JJ.1. This appeal has been preferred in terms of Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Patna High Court. The writ petitioner (the appellant herein) is aggrieved by the order dated 5.8.1999, passed in CWJC. No. 10197 of 1997 (Komal Tiwari v. The State of Bihar and Ors.), whereby the writ petition has been dismissed, and the order of his dismissal from service as a Constable has been upheld. We shall go by the description of the parties occurring in the writ petition.2. The writ petitioner was a Constable in the Bihar Police Force. He was involved in an occurrence which had taken place on 12/13.5.1993, and allegations had been levelled against him for impersonating as a member of an escort party assigned the duty of checking ticketless travellers. He was not a member of the escort party, but he was in police uniform without the badges, and was found extracting money from a ticketless traveller as well as ill-treating and beating him. Learned inquiry ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »