Patna Court May 2012 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.
Radha Ram Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3776 of 2010 Radha Ram son of Sri Daroga Choudhary, resident of Nalanda Colony, Khajpura, Police Station Shastri Nagar, District Patna, at present posted as the Suprintending Engineer, Head Works Circle, Bagmati Nagar Camp, Sitamarhi, Distt. Sitamarhi. ------ Petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through Sri Anup Mukherji, the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna.2. Sri Ajay Naik, the Principal Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.3. Sri Ashok Kumar Prasad, the Joint Secretary (Management), Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.4. Sri Rabindra Shankar, the under Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar, Patna. ------ Opposite parties. ---------------------------------- 5. 11.01.2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Opposite parties on petition of show cause and reply to the show cause. The petitioner has prayed for initiat...
Ramesh Singh Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.43752 of 2011 Ramesh Singh Versus The State Of Bihar ---------------------------------- 2. 11.01.2012 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State. For the reasons mentioned in para 3 of the modification application read with the supplementary affidavit filed today, the order dated 28.9.2011 in Cr. Misc. No. 33084 of 20112 arising out of Chhatapur PS Case No. 34 of 2007 (Sessions Trial No. 254 of 2007) pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. II, Supaul, is modified to the extent that the direction for Raju Kumar Singh to be one of the sureties is recalled and substituted by direction that Sri Ram Swaroop Singh alias Ramroop Singh son of Late Ravi Singh stated to be cousin father-in-law of the petitioner shall be one of the sureties. Other contents of the order remain unmodified. The application is allowed. Let this order be communicated by fax at the cost to be deposited by the petitioner. Snkumar...
Prem Shankar Singh and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.400 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Prem Shankar Singh 2. Mina Singh 3. Ranjana Singh @ Ranjana Kumari 4. Suman Singh @ Rubi @ Rubi Kumar .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.1236 of 2012 ====================================================== Madhuresh Kumar Singh @ Ravi Singh .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar & Anr .... .... Opposite Party/s =====================================================11. 01-2012 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners, informant and the State. The petitioners being the family members of the husband and the husband are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. On instructions, both counsels for the petitioners and the informan...
Raja Ram Sharma Vs. Union of India and ors
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2290 of 2011 Raja Ram Sharma V Union Of India & Ors ---------------------------------- 4. 11.01.2012 Counsel for the Opposite party nos. 6 & 7 produces a Xerox copy an order alleged to have been passed by the District Magistrate dated 30.12.2011 which reads that road has been constructed over the some part of Plot nos. 161 & 162 belonging to the petitioner. NPCC was directed to restore the status and possession of the plots to the petitioner within thirty days from the date of the order. It is submitted that the order shall be complied within time. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the Court had also directed that in the event of a finding for unauthorized intrusion by excavation or uprooting the crops, the question of compensation shall also be considered by the District Magistrate, for which the petitioner has filed an application. If the District Magistrate has passed an order on 30.12.2011, the Court ...
Kunti Devi Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.30720 of 2011 Pradeep Rai, Son of Late Banke Bihari Rai, R/o Village Baraipatti, P.S. Yadopur, District Gopalganj. .Petitioner Versus The State Of Bihar ..Opposite Party ------------------ With Criminal Miscellaneous No.35642 of 2011 Kunti Devi, Wife of Sri Shivnath Prasad, R/o Village Kuchaikot, P.S. & P.O. Kuchaikot, District Gopalganj. .Petitioner Versus The State Of Bihar ..Opposite Party ----------------- 04/- 11/01/2012 Since both the applications arising out of one case are taken up together and being disposed of by this composite order. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, who is armed with carbon/xerox copy of the case diary up to paragraph 39 dated 23/10/2011. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 408, 420, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, are named accused in t...
Sk. Sultan @ Sultan Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.26905 of 2010 Sk. Sultan @ Sultan Versus State Of Bihar ---------------------------------- 5. 11.01.2012 One week time is granted to the petitioner to take steps for fresh service of notice on opposite party no.2 under Registered cover with A.D. Let ordinary process of notice also be served upon the complainant through her counsel appearing before the learned Court below through the office of the learned Court below. In the event that no counsel is appearing, let the notice be kept on the record of the learned lower Court for being served upon the complainant as and when she appears. Requisites for the above must be filed within two weeks. In the meantime no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner in Complaint Case No. 1716/2006 pending in the Court of S.D.J.M., Katihar. List this case soon after service of notice. ( Vikash Jain, J.) Fahad....
Madhuresh Kumar Singh @ Ravi Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and anr
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.400 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Prem Shankar Singh 2. Mina Singh 3. Ranjana Singh @ Ranjana Kumari 4. Suman Singh @ Rubi @ Rubi Kumar .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.1236 of 2012 ====================================================== Madhuresh Kumar Singh @ Ravi Singh .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar & Anr .... .... Opposite Party/s =====================================================11. 01-2012 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners, informant and the State. The petitioners being the family members of the husband and the husband are apprehending their arrest in a case registered under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. On instructions, both counsels for the petitioners and the informan...
Basanti Devi and anr. Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.1540 of 2012 Basanti Devi & Bameshwar Ram Versus The State Of Bihar ---------------------------------- 02. 11.01.2012. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with a case in which cognizance has been taken for the offence under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners happened to be the mother- in-law and father-in-law respectively. It is contended that they have falsely been implicated in this case. The case basically is of a matrimonial discord between the husband and wife and they have been dragged in the present case simply because they are relatives. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioners, namely, Basanti Devi and Bameshwar Ram in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/communication of...
The State of Bihar and ors Vs. Shiv Narayan Mandal and ors
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Letters Patent Appeal No. 2016 of 2011 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 3947 of 2005 With Interlocutory Application No. 8945 of 2011 And Interlocutory Application No. 8946 of 2011 In Letters Patent Appeal No. 2016 of 2011. ====================================================== The State of Bihar & Ors. .... .... Appellant/s Versus Shiv Narayan Mandal & Ors. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mrs. Namrata Mishra, GP 17.For the Respondent Nos. 2-4: Mr. Dhrub Mukherjee, Advocate. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE11. 01-2012 Learned Advocate Mrs. Namrata Mishra appears for the appellants State of Bihar and others. She states that she shall furnish true and complete present address of the respondent no. 1 within five days...
Rabindra Kumar Gupta Vs. the Union of India and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-11-2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.5215 of 2011 Rabindra Kumar Gupta Versus The Union of India & Ors. ---------------------------------- 04. 11.01.2012 Counsel for the Union states that Union has been advised to file L.P.A. against the order dated 30.07.2010 passed in C.W.J.C. No.7709 of 2002, alleging non-compliance whereof present contempt petition has been filed. Aforesaid order dated 30.07.2010 was passed one and half years prior to the filing of the present contempt petition on 22.11.2011 and appreciating such fact this Court under order dated 12.12.2011 allowed four weeks time to the counsel for the Union to seek instruction and file show cause, which has not yet been filed and it is submitted that the proposed L.P.A. filed against the order dated 30.07.2010 was presented for stamp reporting defects pointed out has already been removed, but the LPA has not been numbered. This contempt petition has been filed alleging non- compliance of the...
- ‹ Prev
- 206
- 207
- 208
- 209
- 210
- 212
- 213
- 214
- 215
- 216
- Next ›
- Last »