Patna Court August 2007 Judgments
Suresh Kumar Roy and anr. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-10-2007
J.N. Bhatt, C.J.1. In both these Letters Patent Appeals under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Patna High Court, common questions of law are involved. Therefore, upon request of the learned Counsels for the parties, they have been heard together and are taken up simultaneously for decision by this common judgment.2. While in L.P.A. No. 109 of 2007, the challenge is against the order of the learned Single Judge, dated 6.11.2006, recorded in CWJC No. 9325 of 2006, in LPA No. 160 of 2007, the challenge is against the order, dated 27.9.2006, passed in CWJC No. 5436 of 2006 by the learned Single Judge. By the impugned orders, both the writ applications came to be dismissed, firstly, on the ground that list of recognized Teachers' Training colleges did not include the college, namely, Rahmania Primary Teachers' Training College, Chit Bhagwatipur, Chandwara, District Muzaffarpur (Training College), where the original writ petitioners, appellants before us, studied and secondly, that th...
Tag this Judgment!Chakradhar Das Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-09-2007
J.N. Singh, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This writ application has been filed for quashing of the order as contained in Annexure-13 dated 01.8.2000, by which, pursuant to the liberty granted by this Court in the earlier writ application, punishment order has been passed afresh against the petitioner imposing punishment of withholding 25% pension permanently and depriving the petitioner from any payment of the suspension period except the subsistence allowance.3. The facts of the case are that on account of non-complaince and disobedience of the transfer order petitioner was put under suspension. Thereafter departmental proceeding was initiated against the petitioner and the petitioner was served with a charge and show cause notice. Petitioner filed his show cause in which he denied the charges and gave explanations with regard to his absence from duty. After consideration of the show cause of the petitioner, punishment order was passed against him withholding five ann...
Tag this Judgment!Dipak Kumar Singh @ Dipak Kumar Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-09-2007
Dharnidhar Jha, J.1. Heard.The petitioner was found in possession of 1 pond of heroin as per the first information report as also the seizure memo. The allegation is that police, having learnt that some persons were likely to deal in heroin in Gandhi Maidan, had put itself on wait and then the seizure was made from the petitioner and another accused Amit Kumar.2. The contention is that admittedly there was no compliance of Section 50 of the N.D.P.S. Act and in the light of State of Punjab v. Balbir Singh reported in : (1999)6SCC172 the seizure of one pound of heroin from the possession of the petitioner could not be of any significance and in fact it could not be said to be a seizure and as such the petitioner should be admitted to bail. It was further contended by citing before me 1995 (2) P.L.J.R. 387 Satyendra Sah v. The state of Bihar that the non-compliance with the mandatory provision of Section 50 N.D.P.S. Act could be considered at the time of hearing of the petition for bail ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Chandra Prasad Keshari Vs. Lakshmi NaraIn Jaiswal (Dead) Represent ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-08-2007
Syed Md. Mahfooz Alam, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 10.4.1976 passed by Sri Ram Swarath Shahi, Additional District Judge IIIrd, Patna, in Title Suit No. 27 of 1975, whereby he has been pleased to dismiss the suit of the plaintiff-appellant for grant of probate of the Will dated 10.1.1970 alleged to have been executed by Most. Gujari Devi.2. Plaintiff's case, in brief, is that Most. Gujari Devi w/o late Madan Lal Kesharwani was the resident of Mohalla Dalhatta Patna City, P.S. Malsalami, District: Patna. The plaintiff claims to be the grand son in relation of the said Gujari Devi and being her grand son he was residing with Most. Gujari Devi and was looking after her affairs. The said Gujari Devi was very much pleased with the services rendered to her by the plaintiff and, so, she had full love and affection with the plaintiff and in token of love and affection she executed a Will in favour of the plaintiff with respect to her entire proper...
Tag this Judgment!Ritu Raj Vs. Central Bank of India and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-08-2007
J.N. Bhat, C.J. and Mihir Kumar Jha, J.1. By this Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent, the appellant has assailed the judgment of the learned single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 6806/2005, recorded, on April 3, 2007, whereby,' the claim of the appellant-original writ petitioner for appointment on compassionate basis due to death of his father dying in harness in bank service, came to be rejected.We have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties at the admission stage at a great length. We have considered the text and tenor of the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge. We have, also, examined the underlying design and object of appointment on compassionate basis.2. The claim for appointment on compassionate basis due to death of the father in harness while serving the respondent-Bank came to be rejected mainly on the ground of not answering the eligibility criteria of financial status, firstly, by the Bank authority and, secondly, by the learned single J...
Tag this Judgment!State of Bihar Vs. Rudra Narayan Dev and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-08-2007
Madhavendra Saran, J.1. Government Appeal No. 39 of 1993 has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 27.5.1993 passed by Shri Om Prakash Pandey, 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Purnea in Sessions Tr. No. 93 of 1992 by which he acquitted all the respondents. Cr. Revision No. 558 of 1993 has been preferred by the informant Pandey Prasad Dev against the same judgment of acquittal dated 27.5.1993 passed in Section Tr. No. 93/92. Hence both these two matters have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 7.8.1990 informant Panday Prasad Dev filed a written report before the Superintendent of Police, Purnia stating therein that his daughter Leela Devi was married to accused-respondent Amaresh Kumar Dev son of Rudra Narayan Dev of village Bhatta Bari P.S. Forbesganj, District Purnia on 26th June, 1988. He further stated that her husband Amresh Kumar Dev, her father-in-law Rudra Narayan Dev, her mother-in-la...
Tag this Judgment!Mahendra Yadav and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-07-2007
Madhavendra Saran, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 29.4.1993 passed by learned VIIth Additional Session Judge, Munger in Sessions case No. 520/1990 by which he convicted the three appellants Under Section 307 read with 34 of the Penal Code and sentenced each of them to undergo R.I for 10 years. He further sentenced appellants No. 2 and 3 to suffer R.I for 5 years Under Section 27 of the Arms Act. All the sentences, however, were directed to run concurrently.2. Shortly stated the prosecution case is that on 6.4.1990 at about 8 PM the informant, Balmiki Yadav (PW3) gave fard bayan before the police that on the same day there was quarrel between the children at 6 PM and Bhulla Devi (PW4), the mother of informant, went to protest appellant No. 1, Mahendra Yadav but appellant No. 1 became annoyed and asked to assault her thereupon the other two appellants named Ram Bilash Yadav and Suresh Yadav came armed with pistol and when the informant and his m...
Tag this Judgment!Suneeta Kumari Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-06-2007
Ghanshyam Prasad, J.Heard.1. This application has been filed for quashing of the order dated 26.4,2006 passed by Additional Sessions Judge-XII, Patna in Cr. Rev. No. 650 of 2005 thereby he has set aside the order dated 7.7.2005 passed by S.D.J.M., patna in Danapur P.S. Case No. 273 of 2000 rejecting the petition filed by the opposite parties under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C.2. The fact of the case is that the petitioner-informant lodged fardbeyan against the opposite parties before Danapur P.S. upon which the police registered Danapur P.S. Case No. 273 of 2000 under Sections 498A, 323, 353/34 of the I.P.C. After investigation, the police submitted chargesheet against the opposite parties. Accordingly, cognizance under the above sections including under Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act was taken. In course of the trial, the accused-opposite parties filed a petition under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C. for discharge which was rejected by the learned S.D.J.M. and directed the opposit...
Tag this Judgment!Sameer Das and anr. Etc. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-05-2007
1. Both the appeals arise out of the same Judgment and, as such, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Sameer Das and Bipul Sharma (Appellants in Cr. Appeal No. 342 of 2006) and Amarjeet Singh and Jagir Singh (Appellants in Cr. Appeal No. 409 of 2006), being aggrieved by the judgment dated 27th of February, 2006 and order dated 28th of February, 2006 passed by the Special Judge, Purnea in Special Case No. 1 of 2001 holding them guilty of offences under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and inflicting punishment of rigorous imprisonment for 12 years and fine of Rs. 1 lac. each, in default to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months, have preferred these appeals.3. According to the allegation, on receipt of a telephonic message by the Assistant Commissioner of Custom (Preventive), Forbesganj that contraband ganja is being transported along with jute in a truck to Kolkata via Kishanganj, a preventi...
Tag this Judgment!Sheopujan Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-03-2007
Mihir Kumar Jha, J. 1. In this case, pursuant to the earlier order, dated 26.07.2007, the Director. Primary Education and the Director, Administration of the Education Department are present. Similarly, the District Education Officer, Siwan and the District Provident Fund Officers. Siwan and Muzaffarpur are present.2. From the counter affidavits filed today, two things have emerged, namely, that the petitioner's period of suspension i.e. 23.07.1993 to 04.07.2000 has been now counted towards qualifying period of his pension and accordingly order for payment of revised pension payment and gratuity payment were issued as contained in Annexures A & B to the supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondents 1, 2 & 3.3. Counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that on account of pay-fixation, his client would be entitled for some more amount of pension and/or gratuity.4. In view of the fact that now the major portion of the grievance of the petitioner by computing the afor...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »