Patna Court June 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.
Rakesh Kumar, and ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar Sharma, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-25-2010
1. Mungeshwar Sahoo,J. This first appeal has been filed by the defendants- appellants against the Judgment and decree dated 20.7.1989 passed by Sri Asarfi Sah, the learned 9th Subordinate Judge, Chapra, in Title Suit No.177 of 1985 whereby the learned Subordinate Judge decreed the plaintiffs- respondents' suit for specific performance of contract dated 8.11.1979 (Ext.1).2. The plaintiff-respondent, Ashok Sharma filed the aforesaid suit for specific performance of the contract as contained in Ext.1 dated 8.11.1979 alleging that he was known to the husband of defendant no.1, late Zamir Hassan. Earlier plaintiff had purchased lands from Zamir Hassan. Defendants no.2 to 8 are the sons and daughters of Zamir Hassan. Late Zamir Hassan had agreed to sell 2 katha of land including 2 rooms and a veramda to the plaintiff on 8.11.1979 for Rs.16,000/-. Out of total consideration of Rs.16,000/- Rs.3000/- was paid and the agreement was executed with condition that the remaining consideration of Rs.1...
Ayodhya Prasad Son of Late Chaturi Rai and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-24-2010
Rakesh Kumar, J.1. Twelve petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of order dated 24.8.2005 passed in Cr. Revision No. 207 of 2004 by the Additional Sessions Judge XII, Patna. By the said order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has rejected the revision petition filed by the petitioners whereby the revisional court has affirmed the order of the learned Executive Magistrate, Sadar, Patna in Case No. 590(M) of 2001 and dropped the proceeding initiated under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. Short fact of the case is that the petitioners are raiyats of Tauzi No. 73, Mauza Chak Amanat Chak Dayanat, Diara; Dujra, Block No. 2, Revenue Thana No. 139, presently Budha Colony Police Station, Sadar Anchal, District Patna, which are recorded in survey records of right and they are descendants and they were in possession of the land in question as claimed by the petitioners. It h...
Bibi Farhana @ Farhana Masreen Wife of Md. Mohiuddin, Vs. the State of ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-24-2010
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 6.10.1999 passed by Shri S.N. Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Katihar, in G.R. Case No. 803 of 1997 , arising out of Katihar P.S. Case No. 186 of 1997. By the said order, the learned Magistrate has rejected the discharge petition filed on behalf of the petitioners.2. Short fact of the case is that Opp. Party No. 2, claiming himself to be Sikmi Raiyat with respect to Plot No. 664 measuring an area of 22 decimals of land, situate in village Devaria, Police Station & District- Katihar, filed a complaint vide Complaint Case No. 357 of 1997 disclosing therein that the complainant for the purposes of purchasing a piece of land had negotiated with the petitioners through their Amlas. The negotiation was settled for a consideration amount of Rs. 18,000/- for total area of 10 Kathas of M.S. Plot Nos. 662...
AtIn Kumar Chowdhury Son of Shri Asit Kumar Chowdhury Vs. the State of ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-24-2010
Rakesh Kumar, J.1. The sole petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of the order dated 1.9.1998 passed by Sri G.S.R. Tripathi, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Gaya in Complaint Case No. 344 of 1998, whereby the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offences under Section 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner and others. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the entire proceeding against him in Complaint Case No. 344 of 1998.2. After filing of the present petition, a supplementary affidavit was filed on behalf of the petitioner clarifying the position that the complaint case was transferred under Section 192 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by order dated 30.6.1998 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya for disposal to the file of Sri G.S.R. Tripathi, 1st Class, Gaya. The transferry court after recording statement of complainant on S...
Surendra Kumar Sinha Son of Late Ramdeo Sinha Vs. the State of Bihar a ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-24-2010
Rakesh Kumar, J.1. The sole petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of the order dated 10.9.1999 passed in Cr. Rev. No. 1 15 of 1998 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge VII, Patna in Bihta P.S. Case No. 48 of 1993 (G.R. No. 346 of 1993). By the impugned order, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge VII, while allowing Cr. Revision No. 115 of 1998 has set aside the order dated 12.2.1998 passed by the learned Magistrate in Bihta P.S. Case No. 48 of 1993. By the order dated 12.2.1998, the learned Magistrate had allowed the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner, who was the Complainant/informant in Bihta P.S. Case No. 48 of 1993. The said petition was filed for adding further charge for offences under Section 368, 420 and 385 in addition to the charges, which was already framed under Sections 365 and 384 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Short fact of the case is that the petitioner initially filed...
Satya NaraIn Prasad, and ors. Vs. the Union of India, and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-24-2010
1. V.N. Sinha, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Punjab National Bank (hereinafter referred to as the Bank).2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 18.10.1995, Annexure-3 passed by the disciplinary authority, where under he has been dismissed from the post of Head Clerk serving in the Motihari Branch of the Bank. He is also aggrieved by the appellate order dated 23.3.1996, Annexure-4, where under appeal filed against the dismissal order dated 18.10.1995, Annexure-3 has been rejected. The appellate order was communicated to the petitioner under memo dated 30.3.1996 and is contained in Annexure-4 to this application.3. It appears, petitioner was proceeded against under charge sheet dated 3.4.1992 alleging that the amounts detailed in Annexure-1 to the charge sheet was received by the petitioner as Head Cashier, but not credited in the account of the party i.e. current account no. 412. Other charge leveled against the petitioner is that the amount s...
Surendra Singh, and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-24-2010
1. Akhilesh Chandra, JJ.- The three appellants were put on trial by framing charges under Sections 302/34 of the Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhojpur at Ara, in Sessions Trial No.104 of 1985 and by judgment delivered on 14.4.1988 the learned trial Judge held the appellants guilty of committing the offences they had been charged with. While passing the order of sentence on appellants, the learned Judge directed each of the three appellants to suffer R.I. for life under Section 302/34 of the Penal Code with another term of R.I. for two years for their individual conviction under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence are being assailed by the appellants in the present appeal.2. The prosecution case is contained in Ext.5, the fardbeyan of P.W. 8 Nand Lal Gope recorded by P.W.10 Raghubansh Prasad Singh on the date of occurrence, i.e., 9.11.1984, at 9.15 A.M. at the place of occurrence where the decease...
Syed Md. Abdus Samad Vs. Md. KalimuddIn and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-24-2010
Chandra Mohan Prasad, J.1. The prosecution case was that on 11.4.1988 at 4:30 P.M., the O.P. No.1 forcibly entered into a room of the disputed house premises which was in possession of the appellant/complainant Syed Md. Abdus Samad who is now dead and his heirs are on record and that when the complainant had protested to it he was jostled away by the O.P. No.1. The complainant had claimed his title and possession over the land on the basis of purchase of house premises from one Md. Hasan @ Anju by virtue of a sale deed dated 14.12.1966 and both the parties were on acute litigating terms and several civil cases were admittedly pending between them and during trial, lot of papers were proved before the trial court in connection with those cases between the parties.2. In support of his case, the appellant/complainant had cited as many as nine witnesses in the complaint petition and they were stated to be the neighbours of the locality. But during trial which was commenced in the year 1998...
Tarkeshwar Singh. Vs. the State of Bihar, and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-24-2010
1. Rakesh Kumar, J. The sole petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , has prayed for quashing of the order dated 25.2.1999 passed by the learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Arrah in Sessions Trial No.349 of 1994, arising out of Arrah Nawada P.S. Case No.75 of 1994. By the said order, the learned Addl.Sessions Judge has refused to add charges under Sections 3,4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act,1908.2. Short fact of the case is that on the basis of fardbeyan of this petitioner, a case vide Arrah Nawada P.S. Case No.75 of 1994 was registered on 8.5.1994 for the offences punishable under Sections 452,324,307 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substance Act. In the F.I.R., the petitioner alleged that on 8.5.1994 in the morning at about 8.00 A.M. unknown accused persons entered into the house of the petitioner and exploded bomb and three persons of the informant side were assaulted...
Surendra Kumar SinhA. Vs. the State of Bihar, and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jun-24-2010
1. Rakesh Kumar, J. The sole petitioner, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has prayed for quashing of the order dated 10.9.1999 passed in Cr.Rev.No.115 of 1998 by the learned Addl.Sessions Judge VII, Patna in Bihta P.S. Case No. 48 of 1993( G.R.No.346 of 1993). By the impugned order, the learned Addl.Sessions Judge VII, while allowing Cr.Revision No.115 of 1998 has set aside the order dated 12.2.1998 passed by the learned Magistrate in Bihta P.S. Case No.48 of 1993. By the order dated 12.2.1998, the learned Magistrate had allowed the petition filed on behalf of the petitioner, who was the Complainant/informant in Bihta P.S. Case No.48 of 1993. The said petition was filed for adding further charge for offences under Section 368, 420 and 385 in addition to the charges, which was already framed under Sections 365 and 384 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Short fact of the case is that the petitioner initially filed a complain...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »