Patna Court July 2010 Judgments
Rakesh Ranjan. Vs. State of Bihar, and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-30-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. None turned up on behalf of opposite party nos. 2 and 3.2. The petitioner complainant-cum- informant has preferred this application under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking quashing of the order dated 27.02.2004 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar in Katihar(Town) P.S. Case No. 72/2003 accepting the final form submitted by the police.3. The relevant facts of the case is that the petitioner filed complaint case no. 51/2003 for offences under Section 420,406, 323, 452, 384, 379 of the Indian Penal Code against opposite party nos. 2 and 3, who are none else than his full brother and his wife.4. On receipt of the complaint petition on 08.01.2003, the court below sought a report from the police station concerned under section 210 of the Criminal Procedure Code, "whether any case was instituted or not regarding the alleged incident" fixing the date 19.02.2003, requisit...
Tag this Judgment!Neelam Kumari, and ors. Vs. State of Bihar, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-30-2010
1. Two petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of an order dated 20.9.2000 passed in Sessions Trial No.222 of 1999 by the Additional Sessions Judge-II, Gaya. By the said order, the learned trial court had summoned the petitioners to face trial along with other accused persons.2. Short fact of the case is that on the written report of opposite party no.2, an F.I.R. vide Gaya Muffasil P.S. Case No.94 of 1989 was registered against seven named accused persons including the petitioners for the offence under Sections 307, 325, 323, 342/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. Subsequently, after the death of victim, Section 302 of I.P.C. was added in the case. However, after investigation, the police submitted charge sheet against four accused persons and both the petitioners were not forwarded for the trial by the police. The case was committed and at the stage of trial, five wi...
Tag this Judgment!Baijnath Singh. Vs. State of Bihar, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-30-2010
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 an order dated 30.9.2000 passed by Sri A.K.Sharma, Judicial Magistrate , 1st Class, Hajipur ( Vaishali) in Complaint Case No.1459 of 2000. By the said order, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offences under Sections 323 and 392 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Short fact of the case is that Opp.Party no.2 , father of one Dharmendra Kumar filed a complaint vide Complaint Case No. 1459 of 2000 in the court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur alleging therein that on the date of occurrence, i.e. on 31.7.2000 at about 7.00 P.M. while he was returning from the market along with his son Dharmendra Kumar, seven accused persons including the petitioner intercepted the complainant and his son at the railway gate ( Imadpur Railway Dhala-38) . It was alleged that accused persons, particularly this petitioner an...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Mahto, and anr. Vs. State of Bihar.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-29-2010
1. These two appeals arise out of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge -III, Khagaria in Sessions Case No. 239 of 2000 on the 2nd of April, 2004 and 6th of April, 2004 respectively in which appellants Sanjay Mahto and Rajiv Kumar Mahto were found guilty for offences under Sections 376 & 302 of the Penal Code and each of them was directed to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for Life and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- each for each of the offences. The third Appellant Surendra Mahto @ Sulo Mahto was found guilty for committing offences under Sections 376/34 & 302/34 of the Penal Code and sentences were passed in the same terms as were passed against the two appellants Sanjay Mahto and Rajiv Kumar Mahto. The appellants challenge the order of conviction and sentence passed against them.2. The deceased, Juli Kumari, went out of her house for attending to the call of nature at about 7.00 a.m. on 24.3.1999. When she did not come back ...
Tag this Judgment!Manorma Devi. Vs. State of Bihar, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-29-2010
1. An innocent boy, who had fallen in love with the daughter of the petitioner, was done to death in a deep rooted conspiracy. The petitioner, who is mother of Mamta Kumari with whom the deceased Bhagwan Jha was having love affair, has approached this Court, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, for quashing of an order dated 20.07.2000 passed by Additional Sessions Judge III, Saharsa in Sessions Trial No 236 of 1998. By the said order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge III, Saharsa, while exercising power under Section 319 of Criminal Procedure Code, on the prayer made by the prosecution, has summoned the petitioner for facing trial along with two other accused persons. For the said occurrence, first information reports vide Sonbarsa PS Case No 25 of 1997 was registered on 03.05.1997 for the offence under Section 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Short fact of the case is that one Pankaj Kumar Bharti, brother of B...
Tag this Judgment!Resham Lal Yadav, and ors. Vs. State of Bihar.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-29-2010
1. Appellants of both the appeals have been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.4, Purnea under Section 302/34 of the IPC by his order dated 30.7.2004 in Sessions Trial No.223 of 1995/Tr.No.196 of 2002 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.2. The case of the prosecution as disclosed in the fardbayan of informant Rajendra Prasad Yadav(P.W.2) is that on 30.7.1987 at about 6.45 P.M. he along with his cousin Dinesh Yadav was coming to his home at village-Samoul from bus stand. They were coming through eastern side of canal of village- Bochabhag. Both of them were on foot having cycles in their hand as the road was muddy. Suddenly Dinesh Yadav who was going ahead of the informant was surrounded by Resham Lal, Yogendra Yadav and Mishri Lal Yadav. Resham Lal Yadav caught hold of the handle of the bicycle and asked about teacher, Shobhit Lal Yadav. The deceased Dinesh Yadav raised objection on which Reshasm Lal Yadav ordered and Jogendra Yadav fire...
Tag this Judgment!Parikshan Rai. Vs. State of Bihar.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-26-2010
1. The sole appellant, Parikshan Rai, has been convicted under Sections 364, 302 and 201 IPC by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. IV, Samastipur in connection with Sessions Trial No. 39 of 1998 / 02 of 2003, by judgement and Order dated 25.02.2004. The appellant has been sentenced to undergo RI for life under sections 364 and 302 IPC and fine of Rs. 10,000/- for each of the offence. No separate sentence has been awarded for offence under Section 201 IPC in view of the life sentence awarded to the appellant under other sections.2. The Shahpur Patori P. S. Case No. 102 of 1991 was instituted on the basis of Station Diary Entry No. 396, dated 19.10.1991, drawn up on the basis of written report of Shashi Bhushan Kunwar, P.W. 7, son of the deceased, Balbhadra Kunwar.3. As per the written report of P.W. 7, dated 14.10.1991, his father Balbhadra Kunwar had gone with Teju Rai to Samastipur on 09.10.1991 and was expected to come back in the evening as stated by him at the time...
Tag this Judgment!Jawahar Prasad. Vs. State of Bihar, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-23-2010
1. The petitioner seeks quashing of the entire proceeding including the order dated 6.5.2004 by which the Judicial Magistrate, Patna City has taken cognizance in C.A. No. 948 of 2003 under Section 427 of the Indian Penal Code.2. On 24.11.2005, the application was admitted with notices to the opposite party no. 2 but despite service of notice and Wakalatnama on his behalf having been filed, he has chosen not to appear before this Court.3. The case of the Complainant is that the petitioner who was a Plumber in Rajendra Memorial Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Agamkuan, Patna, had deliberately left the flow pipe of the over head tank of the roof by pushing it inside the roof by digging a hole at the base of the tank causing overflow of water and causing a loss of Rs. 19,027/- to the Institute between 9.5.2003 to 11.5.2003.4. The Complainant who was the Dy. Director, Rajendra Memorial Research Institute of Medical Sciences, Agamkuan was examined on solemn affirmation and after exam...
Tag this Judgment!Chandra Kishore Singh, and ors. Vs. State of Bihar, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-23-2010
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners files supplementary affidavit. Let it be kept on record.2. Three petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for quashing of an order dated 20.6.2000 passed by the learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Purnea in Cr.Revision No.213 of 1999 / Tr.No.19 of 1999. By the said order, the learned 6th Addl.Sessions Judge has set aside the order dated 29.5.1999 passed by Shri A.K.Modi, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Kishanganj in Complaint Case No.323 of 1998 and the learned 6th Addl.Sessions Judge has directed the learned Magistrate to make further enquiry in the complaint filed by Opp.Party no.2 and proceed in accordance with law. By the order dated 29.5.1999 after conducting enquiry, the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, namely, Sri A.K.Modi had taken cognizance of offences under Sections 323 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code , though the complaint was filed for o...
Tag this Judgment!Ramanuj Singh. Vs. State of Bihar, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-23-2010
1. The petitioner seeks quashing of the entire proceedings including the order dated 1.4.2004 passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sheikhpura in complaint case no. 277 (C)/2003 by which he has taken cognizance under Sections 417, 419, 420, 465, 466, 470, 471 and 120-B I.P.C.2. On 19.10.2005 this application was admitted for hearing and further proceeding in the court below was stayed. Since the opposite party no. 2 had already appeared no notices were separately sent to him. Today both the parties are present in court and advance their rival contentions.3. The background of the case is that the opposite party no. 2 filed a First Information Report which was numbered as Barbigha P.S. case no. 14/2003 stating therein that the petitioner had filed a document of partition purported to have been signed by Srikant Singh and Raj Kumar Singh which was allegedly forged. After close of investigation the police submitted the final report bearing report no. 101/2003 on 4.1.2003in the matter,...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »