Patna Court April 2010 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Santosh Kumar Khirwal Son of StyanaraIn Khirwal, Owner of Khirwal Road ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-05-2010
Rakesh Kumar, J.1. No one appears on behalf of the petitioners.2. Two petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of order dated 16.5.1989 pending in the court of Sri Inderdeo Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna. By the said order, learned Magistrate had taken cognizance for the offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code.3. I have examined the impugned order as well as the materials available on record. I do not find any defect in the order of cognizance.4. Accordingly, the petition stands rejected.5. In this case, by order dated 12.9.1995, while issuing notice to opposite party No. 2, this Court had directed that 'in the meantime further proceeding of the case in the court below shall remain stayed'. Subsequently, by order dated 2.2.1998, the petition was admitted. While admitting the case, this Court directed that in the meantime, interim order dated 12.9.1995 shall cont...
Anand Prasad Rai S/O Late Mahanth Prasad Rai and Jai Nath Singh S/O La ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-05-2010
Rakesh Kumar, J.1. Two petitioners, who are said to be vendee of a piece of land appertaining to Plot No. 858 and Khata No. 34, situated at Mohalla- Rajapur, Patna, have approached this Court, while invoking inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to quash the order dated 13.8.1996 passed by Sri Bimal Kumar Sinha, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna. They have also prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding, which has been initiated pursuant to Complaint Case No. 315 (C) of 1996. By the said order dated 13.8.1996, the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance of offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Sri Akhileshwar Pd. Singh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, has challenged the order of cognizance as well as prayed for quashing of the entire proceeding in the case on the ground that on a bare perusal of the complaint petition it appears that it is solely and solely a civil dispute and no o...
Bishnu Shankar Sharma @ Vishnu Shankar Son of Ramadhar Sharma Vs. Stat ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-05-2010
Rakesh Kumar, J.1. No one appears on behalf of the petitioner.2. The present petition was filed for quashing of order dated 23.1.2004 passed by Shri Ashok Kumar, Judicial Magistrate, Patna. By the said order, learned Magistrate had issued summon to the petitioner to face trial. From the F.I.R. i.e. Annexure-1 to the petition i.e. Patliputra P.S. Case No. 67 of 2001, it is evident that the petitioner was named along with Mithilesh Sharma and others. However, after investigation, the police accepting the plea of ali bi of the petitioner did not forward him to face trail. Other accused was sent for trial. Subsequently, after examination of one prosecution witness, a petition was filed under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. to summon this petition to face trial. The learned Magistrate, after examining the evidence of P.W.1 and other materials available on record accepting the plea of informant, has passed order dated 23.1.2004 for issuance of summon to the petitioner to face trial. The learned M...
Yugal Kishore Singh @ Yugal Kishore Singh Son of Late Praduman Singh a ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-05-2010
Sheema Ali Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, the Opposite Party No. 2 and the A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.2. The dispute arises between the present Trustee and ex-trustee of the Sarv Mangala Devi Trust. The petitioners are the Office bearers & Members of the Bihar Religious Trust who have been appointed to run the Trust. The dispute is that the Bihar Religious Trust considers the trust to be a public trust whereas the ex-trustees are claiming that the trust is a private trust. A suit has been filed which is Title suit No. 211 of 1999 by the ex-trustees of the Sarv Mangala Devi Trust which is still pending. The interim orders passed in the suit have travelled upto the High Court and lastly, the Opposite Party No. 2 had challenged the order by which the Bihar Religious Trust had constituted a committee vide Memo No. 2398 dated 19.08.1999 to run the Trust.3. This order was challenged before the High Court and finally this Court by order dated 19.03.2010 pas...
Karamdeo Singh @ Karndeo Singh Son of SudIn Singh and ors. Vs. Karu Si ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-05-2010
Shyam Kishore Sharma and Gopal Prasad, JJ.1. Both the above appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this judgment because they have arisen out of a common judgment dated 22.12.2003 passed by Sri S.Ahmad, Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. III, Munger in Sessions Case No. 166 of 1995 whereby appellants of both the appeals were found guilty. The appellants Karu Singh and Kaili Devi (Cr.Appeal No. 55 of 2004) were found guilty under Sections 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and were convicted thereunder. By order dated 23.12.2003 they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life only under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code with a fine of Rs. 2000/- each and in default of payment of fine, they were further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The rest appellants i.e. appellants of Cr.Appeal No. 23 of 2004 were found guilty under Section 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and they were convicted thereunder. They were...
Sardar Darshan Singh, Vs. the State of Bihar and Sardar Surjit Singh, ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-05-2010
Rakesh Kumar, J.1. Three 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 2.9.1994 passed by the 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Patna in Cr.Revision No. 562 of 1991. By the said order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge,Patna allowed the revision petition preferred by Opp.Party No. 2 , who was complainant in Complaint Case No. 111 of 1991.2. The complainant had filed Complaint Case No. 111 of 1999 alleging therein that the accused persons including the petitioners have committed offence under Sections 323,341, 448 , 427 , 379, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It was alleged that the wall of the complainant was forcefully demolished by the accused persons and in the said occurrence, the complainant was also assaulted and he has suffered a loss of Rs. 1000/-. After filing of the complaint petition and examining the complainant on S.A., the learned Magistrate referred the mat...
Paras Lall @ Parsuram Prasad Shrivastav, Son of Late Bhola Lall Vs. Ha ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-05-2010
Rakesh Kumar, J.1. The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer to quash the order dated 31.10.1998 passed in Complaint Case No. 1007 of 1998/Misc.58 of 1998 by Shri P.C. Chaudhary, Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj. By the said order, learned Magistrate had taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 465, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Sri Sanjay Kumar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that on same and similar allegation, the opposite party No. 1 had earlier filed a complaint case vide Complaint Case No. 440 of 1991. In the said complaint case, by order dated 25.6.1993, court had directed for issuance of summons after conducting enquiry. Subsequently, the said complaint petition was dismissed on 20.10.1993 due to none prosecution of the case. However, by order dated 7.12.1993, the learned Magistrate recalled its earlier order and restored the complaint petition to its original file.3. Aggrieved with the order of recall/restoration date...
Gupta Homes Private Ltd. Through Its Managing Director, Rabindra Prasa ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-05-2010
Sheema Ali Khan, J.1. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 25.04.2009 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Patna in Complaint Case No. 415C of 2009 by which the Court below has taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 406 & 420 of the Indian Penal Code.2. A contplaint was filed by Maman Kumar Agrawal alleging that they had booked a flat in a multi-storied building which is known as Deep Leela Residential Complex, consisting of six floors for residential purposes. The construction of the building started in the month of November, 2006 and was to be completed in December, 2008. It is said that Flat No. 509 having a total built area of 1154 sq. feet being total worth of Rs. 12,11,700/- would be the cost of the said flat. The complainant by various cheques, drafts and cash paid a total sum of Rs. 9,87,000/-. It has specifically been stated at paragraph 14 that the complainant in the aforesaid manner paid a total sum of Rs. 9,87,000/- by the month of...
Kapil Manjhi Son of Faguni Manjhi, Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-02-2010
Shyam Kishore Sharma and Dinesh Kumar Singh, JJ.1. Though the appellants of above noted appeals have been convicted and sentenced by two different trials and by two different Presiding Officers but the occurrence was one, so the above noted appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The appellant Kapil Manjhi of Cr. Appeal No. 125 of 2001 was convicted on 16th January, 2001 in Sessions Trial No. 236 of 1998 / 34 of 1998 by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nawadah for offences under Sections 302 read with Section 34 and 449 of the Indian Penal Code and he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and further he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 449 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Appellants Rambilash Manjhi (Cr. Appl. No. 265 of 2003), Chandra Manjhi and Deoki...
Ramashish Yadav @ Motor Yadav Son of Gharbharan Yadav, Vs. the State o ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-02-2010
Rakesh Kumar, J.1. This case was earlier called out on 23.3.2010. However, none appeared on behalf of the petitioners. It was ordered to list this case on 29.3.2010. Thereafter, the case was repeatedly called, but none appeared. Today, against when the case was called out, none appeared on behalf of the petitioners. However, learned Counsel Sri Vishwajeet Kumar Mishra is present on behalf of opposite party No. 2.2. Three petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of order dated 29.7.1998 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gopalganj in Case No. 93 of 1998/Tr. No. 799, of 1998. By order dated 29.7.1998, the learned Magistrate had taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 498 A and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.3. In the present petition, the petitioners had taken a ground that on earlier occasion also, a complaint petition was filed...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »