Patna Court April 2010 Judgments
Devendra Sharma Son of Chandradeo Singh, Vs. the State of Bihar and Sm ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-16-2010
ORDERThe informant/petitioner Shyampati Devi stated in her aforesaid petition that this case was instituted on the fardbyan given by the informant Shyampati Devi before Makhdumpur P.S. Case No. 134/94 Under Section 302/34 I.P.C. for the murder of the brother of the informant but it is alleged that the Makhdumpur Police in collusion of the accused persons, made perfunctory investigation and did not take trouble to take the evidence of the witnesses of this case. It is further stated that the informant already submitted protest petition in this case in the court in the very initial stage of the case. The I.O. submitted F.R. stealthily in this case although they always assured the informant that the investigation was going on. The informant alleged that when enquired about the record, she got reply from the office that the record is not traceable presently and lastly, she came to know that F.F. has already been received and the same already been accepted by the predecessor court. It is al...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Bihar Vs. Dablu Alias Dabla Mandal,
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-16-2010
Dharnidhar Jha, J.1. The batch of four appeals and the Death Reference arise out of the judgment of conviction dated 18.12.2007 passed by Fast Track Court - II, Banka in Sessions Trial No. 642 of 2002 by which the appellants Dablu alias Dabla Mandal, Sikki alias Sikia Mandal and Mannu Mandal were held guilty of committing offence under Section 43 6/34 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to undergo R.I. for life. They were also convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and each of them was directed to suffer R.I. for five years as also to pay a fine of rupees two thousand. There was no order as to what could be the sentence in case of default in paying the fine. The above three appellants were convicted also under Section 302 of the IPC and were directed to be hanged by their necks till each of them was dead. Besides, the appellants Dablu alias Dabla Mandal and Sikki alias Sikia Mandal were also found guilty of offence under Section 323 of IPC and each of the two wa...
Tag this Judgment!Banshidhar Jha Son of Late Krishna Ballabh Jha Vs. the State of Bihar ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-16-2010
J.N. Singh, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the State.2. Petitioner has filed this writ application for a direction to the respondents to make payment of his regular salary including arrears. He has also prayed for quashing of the order of the respondent Director, Primary Education dated 20.10.2001, as contained in Annexure-10, by which, after remand from this Court, claim of the petitioner has been considered and rejected.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed in the School in question i.e. Primary School, Raghopur Giripatti in Saharsa district on 1.6.1970, which was an aided school. The School was later on considered for take over under the policy decision of the Government and was finally taken over in 1973 with effect from 1.1.1971. He submits that the case of the petitioner was not considered for take over in 1973 when the school was taken over as he was untrained. He submits that the report of the Bloc...
Tag this Judgment!Sona Mani Devi Daughter of Raj Kumar Das and ors. Vs. the State of Bih ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-15-2010
Rakesh Kumar, J.1. Five petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of the order dated 4.8.1998 passed by Sri A.K. Shrivastava, Judicial Magistrate, Hilsa in Complaint Case No. 474(C) of 1997. By the said order, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offence under Section 380 of the Indian Penal code.2. The short fact of the case is that on 11.12.1997 Opp. Party No. 2 , who was the father-in-law of petitioner No. 1, filed a complaint vide Complaint Case No. 474C of 1997 arraying all the petitioners as accused in the said case. In sum and substance in the complaint petition, it was alleged that on 19.7.1997 while petitioner No. 1, who was daughter-in-law of the complainant, was staying in her in-laws house, petitioner Nos. 2 to 5 conspiring with petitioner No. 1 committed a theft in the house of the complainant. It was alleged that ornaments and other house-hold articles were stolen...
Tag this Judgment!Jebari Devi Wife of Devendra Prasad Rai Vs. the State of Bihar and ors ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-15-2010
Rakesh Kumar, J.1. The sole petitioner aggrieved with the order dated 3.3.1998 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi in Cr. Revision No. 257 of 1997 arising out of G.R. No. 199 of 1994 Tr. No. 262 of 1997, has approached this Court, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. By revisional order i.e. order dated 3.3.1998, the learned Sessions Judge had quashed the order dated 15.5.1997 passed by Shri R.C. Mishra, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, whereby, while exercising power under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, summons were issued to opposite party Nos. 2 to 11 of the present case to face the trial.2. Short fact of the case is that earlier the petitioner filed a complaint case arraying opposite party Nos. 2 to 11 as well as her husband and second wife as accused persons. It was alleged in the complaint petition that during the life time of the petitioner, the husband married with one Janak Dulari Devi. S...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Ram Das, Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-15-2010
ORDERDipak Misra, C.J.IA. No. 2030 of 20101. This is an application for condonation of delay of 67 days in preferring the appeal.2. We have heard Mr. Sidheshwari Pd. Singh, learned senior Counsel, along with Mr. M.P. Singh, learned Counsel for the appellants, on the question of limitation.3. Before adverting ourselves to the issue of limitation, we thought it apt to dwell upon the merits of the appeal whether issuance of notice on the question of limitation is warranted.4. The appellants invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court for issue of a writ of certiorari for quashing the notification contained in Memo No. 4549 dated 4.10.2001 issued by the Board of Religious Trust, whereby individual property of the petitioners had been declared as Trust property of Makandpur Thakurbari. It was contended before the learned Single Judge that the said properties had been purchased by the ancestors of the petitioners in the year 1965 by registered sale deed and mutation had already been effected...
Tag this Judgment!Molina Khatoon @ Malina Khatoon W/O. Md. Rahman @ M. Rahman Vs. the St ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-15-2010
Chandra Mohan Prasad, J.1. This appeal is against the Judgment of Conviction and Sentence dated 27.02.2007 of the Addl. Sessions Judge-I, Bhojpur, Ara passed in N.D.P.S. Case No. 5 of 2003/12 of 2004, whereby the appellant, on having been found to have contravened the provisions of Section 8(c) of the N.D.P.S. Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) due to having possessed 37 Kgs. of Ganja contained in her attaiche and airbag and therefore, she was convicted under Section 20(b) of the Act and sentenced to suffer R.I. for ten years and to pay a fine of one lakh and in default of payment of fine to undergo R.I. for one year.2. The informant (P.W.1), Raj Kumar Paswan stated in his written report (Ext-2) that on 09.07.2003 at about 8.05 a.m. he received telephonic information from the Superintendent of Police, Bhojpur that on Ara Barhara Pitch Road a female was going on Commander Jeep No. BR-3 7470 with Ganja contained in her attach and bag and that the Jeep was coming from the side of Ar...
Tag this Judgment!The Union of India (Uoi) Through the Secretary, Department of Telecom ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-15-2010
Sudhir Kumar Katriar and Kishore Kumar Mandal, JJ.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 27.01.2005, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, in O.A. No. 68 of 2003 (Mr. Rizwan Ansari and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.), whereby respondent No. 2 (Chief General Manager, Telecom, Bihar, Circle, Patna) before the Tribunal has been directed to refer the dispute to B.S.N.L. for reconsideration and necessary action within a reasonable period of time since all the liabilities and assets of the Department of Telecom has been shifted to BSNL.2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of the learned Counsel for the parties. A major portion of the duties and functions of the Telecom Department were transferred to the Public Sector undertaking created by the Government of India and now known as Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited. ( in short B.S.N.L.). The original applicants before the Tribunal (six in number) preferred the original a...
Tag this Judgment!Adarsh Rice Mill, Through Its Partner Sri Bishundeo Ojha, Vs. the Stat ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-15-2010
Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.1. All these writ applications have been heard together since common questions of law are involved. There could be a slight variation in the facts because of periods for which procurement of rice has been made by the respondent Food Corporation of India from time to time but the basic dispute which has been carried to this Court is common.2. Government of India, Ministry of Consumer Affairs and Public Distribution as it was known then have been issuing notifications for procurement of rice from various rice mills. For common rice a particular price has been fixed and for Grade-rice some other amounts are notified. This was the minimum basic price for the procurement. The notification in this regard further categorically states 'the above price is exclusive of taxes, if any, leviable at rice stage.3. According to the petitioners, therefore, the minimum basic price notified by the Government of India is the price which these petitioners are entitled to on effecting...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Kalim @ Md. Kalim Ansari Vs. the Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-15-2010
Akhilesh Chandra, J.1. The sole appellant has preferred this appeal against his conviction for the offences under Sections 20(b) (ii)(c) and 23(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the 'NDPS Act') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for fifteen years and a fine of Rs. 1.50 lacs in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for ten months for the offence under Section 23(c) and rigorous imprisonment for fourteen years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1.25 lacs in default of payment of fine further rigorous imprisonment for a period of eight months for the offences under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act. However, sentences are to run concurrently awarded in NDPS Case No. 61 of 2003 / 17 of 2005 by Sri Binay Shanker Mishra, Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 5, East Champaran, Motihari. By same judgment second accused Lal Babu Mian @ Md. Lal Babu, who was also facing trial for the same offen...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »