Patna Court May 2011 Judgments
Umesh Mehta Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-20-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the State. 2. Two appeals i.e. Cr. Appeal No. 409 of 2004 and 411 of 2004 have heard together and being disposed by the common order as both the appeals are against the judgment and order passed in Sessions Trial No. 53 of 1993 which arises out of Birpur P.S. Case No. 96 of 1991 (under Saharsa District) for by which the appellants have been convicted for offence under Sections 302/149, 307/149, 324/149 and 323/149 of the Indian Penal Code and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for offence under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and has further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years for conviction under Section 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code and further sentence to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for two years for offence under Section 324/149 of the Indian Penal Code and further sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Sec...
Tag this Judgment!Arun Kumar Mishra Vs. the State of Bihar and Others
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-20-2011
1. This is yet another glaring example how the functionaries of the Government in higher echelon of the State have remained indifferent and insensitive towards the ply and misery of their subordinates working under them. Since a long time this Court has been noticing that in the matters of permission for medical treatment at specialized centers outside the State, persons close to the powers-that-be manage to get permission very easily and quickly. 2. It is the Government employees at the lower level, specially of class-III and class-IV, who do not get such permission at all or definitely do not get it in time to rush outside the State to avail the best medical treatment of the ailment diagnosed and when there is still time. Invariably, case after case, this Court has come across instances where the employees or their spouses were diagnosed some serious complicated ailment and have to rush to specialized centers outside the Sta...
Tag this Judgment!Khopri Modi and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and anr
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-20-2011
1. The three appellants were charged under Section 313 IPC for being tried by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Munger in Sessions Case No.629 of 1985. By judgement dated 12.01.1994 they were found guilty of committing the above offence and after being heard under Section 235 Cr.P.C. each of the three appellants was directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years as also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in case of default in making the payment of fine each of them was further directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. The appellants have preferred the present appeal to question the propriety and correctness of the judgment of conviction and the sentences passed upon each of them. 2. The prosecution case is contained in the fardbeyan (Ext-3) of Kabitri Devi(P.W.4) recorded on 19.07.1985 at 9.30 P.M. It was stated by P.W.4 that she was a resident of Ramtalli Gunj where she had some agricultural land and she was carrying out agricultural operations ...
Tag this Judgment!Thakur Prasad Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-19-2011
1. The appellants have been convicted u/s.307, 324 I.P.C. and 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to R.I. for seven years, one year and three years respectively by the Sessions Judge, Jehanabad in Sessions Trial No.794 of 1992 by a judgment dated 6.2.1996. 2. The case of the prosecution that on 19.3.1988 while the informant was returning from his duty, suddenly the appellants came on a motorcycle and fired at him, on account of which he was injured on his right wrist. 3. During trial the prosecution in all examined seven witnesses. Out of whom, P.W.2 and P.W.7 are formal witnesses, whereas P.W.6 is the informant. P.W.1, P.W.3, P.W.4 and P.W.5 came at the place of occurrence as soon as the informant was shot at and saw the appellants fleeing away from the place of occurrence. 4. On going throu...
Tag this Judgment!Shiv Charan Ravidas Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-19-2011
1. The appellant nos.1 and 2 have been convicted u/s.307 I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for five years and appellant nos.3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 have been convicted u/s.323 I.P.C. and sentenced to S.I. for six months by the Additional Sessions Judge-II, Nawadah in Sessions Trial No.180 of 1992/ 24 of 1993 by a judgment dated 9.2.1996. 2. The case of the prosecution that on 13.4.1992 when the informant requested the appellants to remove bundles of crops which were touching his wall, an altercation arose between them and in course of which the appellant nos.1 and 2 are said to have assaulted the informant with lathies on his shoulder, whereas rest assaulted him on non-vital parts. 3. During trial the prosecution in all examined eleven witnesses. Out of whom, P.W.1 and P.W.2 have been declared h...
Tag this Judgment!Basant Das Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-19-2011
1. The appellant has been convicted u/s.307 I.P.C. and sentenced to R.I. for ten years by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga in Sessions Trial No.273 of 1994/ 3 of 1996 by a judgment dated 27.1.1996. 2. The prosecution case is that on 5.3.1994 while the informant was taking betel the appellant came there and assaulted him thrice with knife, on account of which he was severely injured. 3. During trial the prosecution in all examined five witnesses. Out of whom, P.W.3 is the brother of the informant and even though he attempted to give eye witness account of the occurrence he conceded in his cross examination that he had reached the place of occurrence after some time when the occurrence was over. P.W.4, the only independent witness, has not supported the case of the prosecution. P.W.1 is the doctor, who examined the informant, whereas P.W.2 is the info...
Tag this Judgment!Mr. G. C. Garg Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-19-2011
1. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 22.5.2000, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna in Complaint Case No. 1269(c) of 1999 by which the Court has taken cognizance against the Managing Director of Lioyda Finance Limited under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. According to the complaint case the complainant had deposited a sum of Rs. 14,000/- in the scheme of Lioyda Finance Limited in which the petitioner was the Managing Director. The transaction took place in Patna. Subsequently the complainant has been paid a sum of Rs. 14,000/-. A compromise petition was also filed in the Court below which has been signed by both the counsels in view of the fact that in similar cases i.e. Cr. Misc. No. 12920 of 2004 disposed of on 17.2.2006, Cr. Misc. No. 35135 of 2004 and Cr. Misc. No. 35165 of 2004, this Court has passed an order quashing the proceeding even though the complainant despite several notices has not...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Sharma Alias Krish Nandan Sharma Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-19-2011
1. The appellant no.1 has been convicted u/s.323 I.P.C. whereas all the appellants have been convicted u/s.426 I.P.C. and ordered to furnish probation bond of Rs.2000/- with two sureties of the like amount for maintaining peace and good behaviour for a period of one year by the Additional Sessions Judge 1 st , Barh in Sessions Trial No.813 of 1992 by a judgment dated 24.7.1996. 2. The case of the prosecution that on 17.8.1991 while the informant was sitting in his office, the accused persons came there and threw away the registers and papers and also abused her. Accused Krishnandan Sharma is said to have assaulted the informant with spade on her head, on account of which she fell down. Thereafter all the accused persons fled away. 3. During trial the prosecution in all examined...
Tag this Judgment!Bihar State Electricity Board Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-17-2011
1. Petitioner Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) is aggrieved by the order dated 15.01.2000, Annexure-2 passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Patna whereunder it has been held that provisions of Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (herein after referred to as the Act) is applicable to the Board as Board is not covered by SubSections-(b)(c) of Section 16(1) of the Act and has further held that the Board is liable to deposit a sum of Rs.2,23,64,855/- towards the P.F. dues of the workers supplied by the contractor engaged in connection with handling of coal/removing of ash at Kanti Thermal Power Unit of the Board during the period between 1986-April, 2000. Board is also aggrieved by the order dated 23.2.2007, Annexure-1 passed by the Employees Provident Fund...
Tag this Judgment!Jagdish Sah Vs. the State of Bihar and Others
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-17-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent Bihar School Examination Board. 2. The petitioner seeks quashing of the Office Order dated 28.1.2003 of the Chairman of Bihar School Examination Board by which the petitioner has been dismissed from service and also the Office Order dated 2.5.2003 by which the appeal filed by the petitioner has been rejected and for other consequential relief. 3. The petitioner at the relevant time was working as Assistant in the respondent Board. On 31.3.2000 he was issued a show cause notice charging him for preparing wrong mark-sheet and issuing duplicate certificate of Gopal Prasad of supplementary examination of 1978. Thereafter the petitioner was placed under suspension by order dated 13.10.2000 and was served with a memo of charge dated 6.1.2001 directing him to file written statement of defence within 15 days. It is the case of the petitioner that on account of non-supply of papers that he...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »