Court : Patna
1. Three petitioners, who are officers of a Government of India Undertaking namely, Pyrites Phosphates and Chemicals Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as P.P.C.L.) are before this Court, while invoking inherent jurisdiction with a prayer to quash of an order dated 14.12.2000 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram. By the said order, the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offence under Sections 33, 41 and 42 of the Forest Act.2. Short fact of the case is that a written report was submitted by one Sri Ravi Shankar Rai, Forest Guard to the Forest Range Officer, Tilouthu disclosing therein that on 29.8.1998 at about 5.00 P.M., while he was moving in Kachchawar restricted forest, he witnessed that some labourers were un-loading waste minerals from Truck and Tractor. He tried to restrain them. However, they disclosed that they were working as Labourers in P.P.C.L. and they un-loaded the waste minerals. It was disclosed that due to such un-loading, about four acres lan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
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 28.3.2000 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rosera in G.O. Case No.188 of 1999, T.R. No.1007 of 2001. By the said order the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offences under sections 182 and 211 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Short fact of the case is that the petitioner had initially filed a written report before the Officer Incharge Hasanpur (Bithan) Police Station on an allegation that Suresh Sah and others had committed offence under sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code. On the basis of written report submitted by this petitioner, first information reports vide Hasanpur (Bithan) P.S. Case No.132 of 1994 was registered on 23.11.1994. After registering the first information report, police conducted investigation and after long delay the police came out with a case that the peti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. None turned up on behalf of the opposite party no.2 the complainant before the court below.2. By filing supplementary affidavit, the petitioners have produced copy of plaint of Title Suit No. 338/2004 filed in the court of 3rd Sub-Judge, Motihari on behalf of complainant against the some of the petitioners.3. This application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 28.09.2004 passed by Sri S.K. Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Sadar Motihari, in Complaint Case No. 170/2004 bearing Trial No. 1912/2004 by which cognizance has been taken for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 380 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code.4. The opposite party no.2 filed a complaint petition bearing case no. 170/2004 on 29.01.2004 against 7 persons alleging therein that the subject matter of the proceeding of an old building containing eight rooms ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Both the above cases have arisen out of & judgment dated 19th July, 1988 passed by Sri Someshwar Nath Pathak, Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur in Sessions Trial No. 25 of 1986 whereby he has acquitted all the above respondents/opposite parties namely, Anju Mian, Wali Mohammad alias Maduli, Muhamad Sayim @ Shamim, Mohamad Quasim, Rasul Bux, Rustam Mia, Mohammad Kalu and Mohammad Anwar from the charges under Sections 302,149 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code for causing death of Md.Iliyas and injury to Md.Abas.2. When both the cases were called out for hearing, no one appeared on behalf of the respondents in Govt.Appeal and none had appeared on behalf of both the parties in revision. After hearing learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the appellant and perusing the judgment and other materials on record, we are disposing of both the above cases.3. Occurrence was of 13.12.1982 and according to allegation, when the informant Md.Abbas was taking betel at the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. The sole petitioner, who was complainant before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj, has come before this Court with a prayer to quash the order dated 4.6.2001 passed in Cr.Revision No.329 of 2000 by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Gopalganj , whereby he has rejected the revision filed by the petitioner and confirmed the order dated 30.8.2000 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj in Complaint Case No.1508 of 1999. By the order dated 30.8.2000 the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate had rejected the complaint petition filed by the petitioner under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. Short fact of the case is that the petitioner filed a complaint on 19.8.1999 in the court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj, which was registered as Complaint Case No.1508 of 1999. In the Complaint petition seven persons, who were mostly government officials, were arrayed as accused for commission of offences under Sections 167,193,420,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Three petitioners, while invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have prayed for setting aside the notice dated 5.12.2000 issued under the signature of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jhanjharpur in Misc. Case No.546 of 2000 on the basis of petition filed on behalf of opposite party nos.2 to 8 for initiating a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973.2. A petition was filed on behalf of opposite party nos.2 to 8 before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Jhanjharpur with a request to initiate a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in relation to land appertaining to Khata No.647, Plot Nos.7628, 7441, 7398, 10538. After filing of the petition on 5.12.2000, the Sub Divisional Magistrate issued notice to the petitioners to file show cause. After receipt of the notice, the petitioners approached this Court by filing the present petition. By an order dated 20.2.2002, this Court directed t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Two petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash an order dated 6.12.1999 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Patna in Complaint Case No.1421 (c) of 1999 and also for quashing of entire prosecution in Complaint Case No.1421 (c) of 1999.2. Short fact of the case is that opposite party no.2 filed a complaint in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, which was registered as Complaint Case No.1421 (c) of 1999. In the complaint petition, it was alleged that petitioner no.1, who was Area Business Manager of Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Patna and petitioner no.2, who was Proprietor-cum-C. &F; Agent of Cadila Pharmaceuticals, Patna persuaded the petitioner to be appointed as Stockist of the medicine of Cadila Pharmaceutical Ltd. It was alleged that for the purposes of his appointment as Stockist, the accused persons got a deposit of Rs.10,00,000/- as security deposit. Out of Rs.10,00,000/- amount, Rs.2,50,000/-...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsels representing the petitioners in all the four cases and learned Additional Public Prosecutors for opposite party.2. All these four cases have been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of order dated 06th February, 2004 passed in Complaint Case no. 322 M of 2004 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, taking cognizance against the petitioners for the offences under Sections 25(U) and 29 of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947 for alleged violation of the provisions under Section 18(3) and Sl. 13 of Schedule 5 B of the said Act, that is, committing unfair labour practice and breach of settlement on Award. The case was transferred for trial to the Court of Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, and Patna.3. It is admitted fact that the complaint was filed by Opposite Party no.2, Labour Commissioner, Patna, who had earlier issued letter no.4198 dated 27th August, 2003 against the petitioners relating to implementa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. The defendants have filed this first appeal against the Judgment and Decree dated 20.4.1979 passed by Sri Md.Ziyauddin, learned Subordinate Judge-XI, Patna, in Money Suit No.162 of 1977 decreeing the plaintiff- respondents' money suit in part.2. The plaintiff-respondents filed the aforesaid suit claiming Rs.13051.61 paise including interest on the principal amount of Rs.7,788.55 paise.3. The plaintiffs prayed for the aforesaid relief on the ground that Sri D.P.Yadav, Principal, I.T.I., Hazaribagh, placed six orders for supply of Tools, Welding Goods and other articles. The plaintiffs after accepting the said offer supplied the said articles and raised bill of Rs.7788.55 paise but the defendants did not pay. After serving notice under section 80 C.P.C. this suit was filed.4. On being noticed the appellants who are defendants in the court below appeared and filed written statement contending that the rate of amount claimed by the plaintiffs was found excessive than the prevailing mark...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.2. This application has been preferred against order dated 16th June, 2005 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad, taking cognizance under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code in Makhdumpur P.S. Case no. 80 of 2005 (G.R. no.535 of 2005, Trial no. 1725 of 2005).3. Perused the lower court records, which were called for by order dated 30th October, 2006 at the time of admission of this application, received as early as on 31st January, 2007. The case was instituted on the self statement of Officer in charge who, on getting confidential information about one tank-lorry bearing registration no.BR-52 / 3077 coming from Patna side with unauthorized diesel therein, conducted checking and found the information correct regarding the vehicle which was stopped. The petitioners were respectively driver and Deputy Driver of the tanker. Other papers were found correct but owner book, dr...
Tag this Judgment!