Patna Court April 2009 Judgments

Chandrama Pandey Son of Late Drigpal Pandey and ors. Vs. the State of ...

Court: Patna

ORDERSheema Ali Khan, J.1. The five appellants have been convicted under Sections 323, 324, 436/149 of the Indian Penal Code by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram in Sessions Trial No. 370 of 1986. The appellants have been convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and also a fine of Rs. 5000/- under Section 436/149 of the Indian Penal Code, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 324/149 of the Indian Penal Code and further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 323/149 of the Indian Penal Code. All the sentences are to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case is based on the fardbayan of Chhotan Ram. According to the informant, there is a plot of land 709/716 having an area of 13 decimals situated at village Jagdishpur which was in the possession of the informant and other harijans of the village. It is said that there were dwelling houses over that plot which were allocated to them by the Block Development O...

Sita Devi Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

Reported in: 2009CriLJ3743

ORDERSamarendra Pratap Singh, J.1. The informant is aggrieved by order dated 17-6-2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge VIII, Patna, in Sessions Trial No. 1038/2005 by which he allowed the discharge petition of O.P. No. 2.2. The informant's daughter, namely, Sangita Devi, was married to one Raj Kumar, son of O.P. No. 2, Rajmati Devi, wife of Triyug Choudhary, on 3-12-2004. The O.P. No. 2 is mother-in-law.3. The informant alleged that her daughter complained by Mobile Phone that her husband, father-in-law, mother-in-law and dewar are torturing her. However, the informant in her subsequent statement did not make any allegation against her mother-in-law, O.P. No. 2.4. The learned trial Court discharged the O.P. No. 2 vide his impugned order dated 17-6-2006 stating therein, that even the eldest daughter of deceased Sangita Devi who was examined twice by the I.O. in course of investigation, did not make any allegation against the O.P. No. 2. The Court below further noticed th...

Satya Narayan Prasad Singh Vs. State of Bihar

Court: Patna

Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.1. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.2. A petition on behalf of the petitioner filed under Section 239 of the Cr.P.C. has been dismissed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai vide order dated 12.2.2007. The said order which is rejected the prayer of discharge is being challenged on many a grounds in this application.3. The short facts are that the petitioner is a retired government servant and on his retirement he was living in the rented house owned by one Chandra Kumar. When he realized that theft of power is being committed by the landlord and the energy is being drawn illegally he felt concerned as a retired civil servant. He informed the higher authority so that suitable action could be taken. The above fact has been reflected in annexure-2 of the application. Soon thereafter a raid had been carried out on 9.11.2001 and an FIR came to be instituted against Chandan Kumar as well as against the present petitioner...

Jeetmal Surana Son of Late Bachh Raj Surana and Navratan Surana Son of ...

Court: Patna

ORDERDharnidhar Jha, J.1. The present petition has been filed by the Ist party to the proceedings under Section 145 Cr. P.C. bearing case No. 276 M of 2000 which related to a dispute allegedly and particularly to some part of R.S. plot No. 2156 to the extent of 46 decimals of land of village Madhuwan under Khata No. 579 within P.S. Janki Nagar in the district of Purnea and the dispute related to the alleged encroachment by the petitioners of the above area of 46 decimals by amalgamating the same with their undisputed plots bearing R.S. plot Nos. 2154, 2148 and 2159 under different khatas in the same village as per the description contained in the impugned order passed by the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Banmankhi.2. Some of the undisputed facts were that three R.S. Plot Nos. 2154, 2148 and 2159 were in the boundary of plot No. 2156 and were definitely under the possession of the petitioners. The opposite party No. 2, i.e., Beer Narayan Yadav, filed a petition for getting his land, bearin...

Kailash Mahto Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2557

Mihir Kumar Jha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the State.2. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed only for issuance of a direction commanding the respondents to regularize his service on the vacant and sanctioned post of clerk in Rajkiyakrit Janta high School, Satayan, district Jamui (hereinafter referred to as 'the school') on the basis that he has been working on the said post for more than last 12 to 13 years.3. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of peon on 15.11.1973 in the school and from that day he has been holding substantive post of peon. It is the case of the petitioner that in the month of April, 1994 the solitary post of clerk in the school became vacant on account of retirement of regular incumbent and as such the Headmaster of the school had entrusted him some work of the post of clerk. The counsel for the petitioner has relied on a letter of the Headmaster o...

Prabha Devi Wife of Sri Ramdayal Sah Vs. the State of Bihar

Court: Patna

Reported in: 2009(57)BLJR2991

ORDERSheema Ali Khan, J.1. The sole appellant has been convicted under Section 23(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years in Customs Case No. 51 of 2000. The appellant has almost completed the sentence as she is in custody since 15.06.2000.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that the raiding party apprehended one Om Prakash at the Bus Stand on receiving information that the traders were carrying Charas. Om Prakash is said to have disclosed that Prabha Devi was accompanying him and she was also carrying Charas. On search, 4 kgs. of Charas was recovered from the lady in question. It is stated that the informant asked the lady whether she would like to be searched in presence of Magistrate. The lady remained silent and did not give any answer. Thereafter, search was made and seizure list was prepared. Samples of alleged Charas were separated to be sent to the Forensic Laboratory ...

Nagdeo Singh Son of Mahgu Singh Vs. the State of Bihar

Court: Patna

Sheema Ali Khan, J.1. The sole appellant has been convicted under Sections 20(a)(b) read with Section 8(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs. 30,000/-, and in default of which to undergo further imprisonment for one year by the Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur, in case No. C-IIA-66 of 1995 vide judgment and order dated 21.11.2006 and 30.11.2006 respectively.2. The prosecution case is that the Excise Inspector on 31.1.1995 along with other members of the team raided the village- Khilwat within the P.S. Bidupur, and found that cannabis plants were growing on a plot of land and also found one bag Ganja stored in the field. The plants were cut and burnt, whereas, the Ganja was seized and sealed by the raiding team.3. Six witnesses have been examined in this case. P.W.1 is Kumar Rabindra Nath, P.W.2 is Panchu Patra, who is the informant of this case, P.W.3 is Siy...

Dr. Mrs. Shanti Roy Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.

Court: Patna

Reported in: (2010)229CTR(Pat)299,[2009]319ITR350(Patna)

1. The appellant in the two appeals is a doctor and gynaecologist and obstetrician and an assessee under the provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act'. The appeals are with respect to the assessment year 1994-95. Miscellaneous Appeal No. 59 of 2002 is with respect to the order of assessment whereby the figures returned by the assessee have been disbelieved, leading to enhancement of gross income. Miscellaneous Appeal No. 420 of 2004 is consequential in nature, whereby penalty have been imposed on the assessee and the dues, have been directed to be recovered with interest.2. The basic facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal shall be drawn from Miscellaneous Appeal No. 59 of 2002, except by specific reference to Miscellaneous Appeal No. 420 of 2004. The assessee at the relevant point of time was in the service of the Bihar Government as a doctor, and was also a private practitioner. She filed returns showing gross income of Rs. 2,85,140 for...

Sundar Yadav and anr. Vs. Asha Kumari and ors.

Court: Patna

Reported in: AIR2009Pat131

S.N. Hussain, J.1. This second appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs-respondents-appellants challenging the judgment and decree of the learned Court of appeal below.2. The matter arises out of Title Suit No. 101 of 1976, which was filed by the plaintiffs for the following reliefs:(a) Declaration that sale deeds dated 12-6-1976 (Exts. C and C/l) executed by defendants 2nd party in favour of defendants 1st party were null and void and inoperative and defendant 1st party had not acquired any title to the suit land.(b) Decree for recovery of possession in respect of the suit land covered by the said illegal and invalid sale deeds dated 12-6-1976.(c) Cost of suit be awarded to the plaintiffs.(d) Any other reliefs as the Court may consider proper.3. Notices were issued to the defendants, who appeared and contested the suit and after considering the pleadings of the respective parties the learned trial Court framed the following issues:(i) Is the suit as framed maintainable? (ii) Have the p...

Md. Iddu, Son of Late Bannu Mian and Tauqir Ahmad @ Md. Takir Ahmad So ...

Court: Patna

ORDERSheema Ali Khan, J.1. These appeals arise out of the judgment dated 18th April, 2006 passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in Trial No. 12 of 2006 by which the two appellants have been convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years each for the offences punishable under Section 20(2)C and 23(c) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The appellants have remained in custody for six years and two months.2. The prosecution case briefly stated is that the appellants were sitting on a bench at Muzaffarpur Railway Station. Six briefcases were kept in front of them. The complainant who had received information regarding the carriage of Ganja suspected that the appellants were carrying Ganja in the said briefcases and retained them for search in order to ascertain whether these appellants were carrying the Ganja. It is said that one of the persons on seeing the raiding party escaped from the railway station....