Patna Court December 2009 Judgments

Sk. Mainu @ MainuddIn Vs. the State of Bihar

Court: Patna

Mandhata Singh, J.1. Three persons including this petitioner were seen with two 'paries'. The petitioner was apprehended while two of them fled away from there. The matter was investigated. After some time charge sheet was submitted. The petitioner faced trial for the offence under Section 414 of I.P.C. and he was convicted by the trial court which has been affirmed by the appellate court also.2. The grievance of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the appellate court did not consider the infirmities and points raised. Judgment of the appellate court mentions the brief of fact, witnesses examined in the case, the defence, statement recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.3. After perusal of the record I find substance in the submission of the petitioner advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner. In concluding portion of paragraph 8 the learned Additional Sessions Judge 1st, Araria for reaching the conclusion has observed as follows:After that he has not done any pairvy...

Ashok Kumar Khare Son of Late D.N. Khare and ors. Etc. Etc. Vs. the St ...

Court: Patna

Sudhir Kumar Katriar, J.1. These matters raise the common question of grant or otherwise of the benefit of continuous officiation to the employees of the State Government in a situation where their cases were considered at the Range level and given officiating promotion to the next higher post, without consideration at the level of the Director General of Police (i.e. the State level), and also without taking into account the cases of all eligible candidates within the zone of consideration, accompanied with the situation that the continuous officiation has gone on for a fairly long length of time.2. We shall first of all take up L.P.A. No. 1542 of 1995 (arising out of C.W.J.C. No. 5937 of 1995), and L.P.A. No. 1543 of 1995 (arising out of CWJC No. 6549 of 1995). The petitioners of C.W.J.C. No. 6549 of 1995, and C.W.J.C. No. 5937 of 1995, have preferred the two appeals under the provisions of Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the High Court of Judicature at Patna and are directed agai...

indra Sinha Wife of Dr. Gopal Prasad Sinham, Vs. State of Bihar and

Court: Patna

Mandhata Singh, J.1. Prosecution case basing complaint filed on behalf of opposite party No. 2 is that she was working as Sewing Instructor on daily wages in Patna Training College for the last 8 to 9 years. She belongs to backward caste. Petitioners are alleged dominating in the institute and were using to say that as she belongs to backward caste she would have to pay Rs. 500/- per month otherwise would not be allowed to continue in service. Thereafter, they stopped the payment. Attendance Register was removed from the month of December, 2000. She was not allowed to sign.2. Petitioner herself was examined as enquiry witness. Further two other witnesses were also examined but cognizance is taken by passing the impugned order for the offence under Sections 504, 477A, 506 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.3. Summon was also issued. Legality, correctness and propriety of the same are questioned on the ground that at the relevant time opposite party No. 2 (complainant) was not working in ...

Prabhat Singh Son of Late Ram Autar Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and o ...

Court: Patna

Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment and order dated 20.05.2009 passed by the Munsif, Sheikhpura in Election Case No. 7 of 2006 by which he has set aside the election of petitioner as Mukhiya of Gagri Gram Panchayat in the district of Sheikhpura and declared respondent No. 6, who was the election petitioner, as elected Mukhiya. Respondent No. 6 has since appeared and counter affidavits have been filed with rejoinder thereto. With consent of parties, this writ petition was heard at this stage itself for its final disposal.2. Elections for the post of Mukhiya of Gagri Gram Panchayat were held on 02.06.2006. The counting of votes was done on 06.06.2006. After counting, on 06.06.2006 itself, petitioner first requested recount of votes at one polling booth. Thereafter, on 07.06.2006, he, in writing, requested for recount of votes declared to be invalid alleging that large number of his valid votes were rejected as invalid. The ...

Shyam Sunder Sah Son of Ram Lochan Sah Vs. the State of Bihar

Court: Patna

Sheema Ali Khan, J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties.2. This application has been filed against the order dated 15.01.2008 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Gopalganj in Criminal Revision No. 46 of 2007.3. The facts are that the defence-Opposite Party before this Court had filed an application to bring on record the case diary of Hussainganj Police Station Case No. 178 of 1990 after the closure of evidence on 21.01.2002. The first petition to bring the case diary on record was filed on 01.09.2003 which was rejected by the Trial Court on 24.09.2003. Against the order rejecting the application, the Opposite Party moved before the Revisional Court and the then Sessions Judge, Gopalganj rejected the revision application on 09.02.2004. The Opposite Party being dissatisfied by the rejection, again filed a petition on 19.07.2006 praying therein that they may be permitted to exhibit the case diary of Hussainganj Police Station Case No. 178 of 1990. The Trial Court by Annexure-2 again...

Drikung Charitable Society Through Its General Secretary True Lhamo Da ...

Court: Patna

ORDERNavaniti Prasad Singh, J.1. By these two writ applications, petitioner has come to this Court against the action of the district authorities and the Nagar Parishad, Bodh Gaya by which it has been asked to not only stop constructions but demolish the same on the ground that it is not in conformity with the master plan for Bodh Gaya which has since been declared a heritage city. Exhaustive counter affidavits have been filed and in view of the pleadings, a firm stand was taken by the petitioner that the draft master plan, as approved by the State Government for Bodh Gaya, was legally invalid in all its aspects. Mr. Advocate General assisted the Court on behalf of respondents. With consent of parties, these two writ petitions are being disposed of at this stage itself.2. Petitioner-organization is a charitable Society and is constructing a meditation centre formed for furthering the teachings of Lord Buddha. It has all clearances from Government of India for bringing funds into India,...

Vyas Pandey Son of Ram Kripal Pandey, Vs. State of Bihar

Court: Patna

Mandhata Singh, J.1. This revision application has been filed against the order dated 28.2.2002 passed by the Second Fast Track Court, Siwan, in Sessions Trial No. 124 of 1999 by which petitioners application for discharge has been rejected and order for framing of charge has been passed.2. Brief fact of the case is that a cow and a bullock of petitioners Vyas Pandey and Surendra Yadav were stolen. On alarm village people gathered and went on in search of the cattle-thieves. Two of the thieves of the stolen cattle were caught and assaulted by villagers of Chhata, Mahual and Badaram. Ultimately they succumbed to their injuries. After the cognizance the case was fixed for hearing. At that stage a petition under Section 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was submitted on behalf of the petitioners praying therein to discharge as no offence under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code was made out. After hearing the parties, prayer was refused. Legality, correctness and propriety of which ...

Sanjeet Kumar Gupta and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and anr.

Court: Patna

Reported in: 2010CriLJ1255

ORDERMandhata Singh, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Counsel for opposite party No. 2 and the State.2. This revision application has been filed against order dated 1-4-2008 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Nalanda at Biharsharif in S. Tr. No. 653 of 2001, arising out of Bihar (Sohsarai) P.S. Case No. 73/1999, by which the petition filed by the petitioners to declare them juvenile and send the case record to the Juvenile Justice Board has been rejected.3. Gravity of the offence for which petitioners are alleged is not needed to be mentioned as age of the petitioners was only in question before the trial Court. It is pertinent to mention hero this much only that once the prayer was made to declare petitioners' juvenile was refused but from this Court an option was given to the petitioners to renew their player with fresh documents, if any, and in that context age is determined concluding the enquiry.4. Incident is of 26-2-1999. At present the Juvenile ...

Gulab Yadav Son of Jagdish Yadav and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and Raghu ...

Court: Patna

ORDERSamarendra Pratap Singh, J.1. In the instant application the petitioners pray for quashing the order dated 11.10.2001, passed in G.R. No. 46/99 by S.D.J.M. Birpur, whereby he has taken cognizance of offence under Sections 147, 148, 307, 504 of the Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and summoned the petitioners to face trial and also the order dated 31.5.2007 passed in Cr. Revision No. 180/01 whereby the revisional court refused to interfere with the order taking cognizance.2. On the written statement of one Raghunandan Yadav, Raghopur P.S. Case No. 8/99 under Sections 147, 148, 380, 436, 307 and 504 of the Penal Code dated 28.1.1999 was registered against 21 named accused persons. The allegation was that all the accused persons armed with deadly weapons attacked the prosecution side, as a result of which quite a number of people sustained both fire arm and other injuries. The police after investigation submitted charge sheet No. 18 of 2001 dated 3.5.2001 under Sections 147,...

Kuwar Umesh Pratap Mall S/O Late Awadesh Pratap Mall Vs. the State of ...

Court: Patna

V.N. Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State, who has filed third supplementary counter affidavit, which is taken on record. The counsel for the petitioner has filed rejoinder thereto, which is also taken on record.2. Counsel for the State respondents before going into the merits of the matter, prayed for dismissal of the writ application on the ground of delay and laches. The submission that the writ application should be dismissed on the ground of delay and laches is fit to be rejected as when the State respondents began to disturb the possession of the petitioner over lands in question, petitioner had no option, but to approach this Court. In the circumstances, writ case has to be considered on merits.3. It appears, petitioner has filed this writ application praying, inter alia, to direct the State respondents to hand over possession of 1 bigha 6 kathas and 2 dhurs of land bearing plot No. 2511, Khata No. 94 of village Nautan to the petitioner as the said ...