Patna Court February 2014 Judgments
Jainendra Kumar Singh @ Jainendra Singh Vs. the Bihar State Electricit ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-05-2014
Petitioner, Jainendra Kumar Singh@Jainendra Singh who has been arrayed as one of an accused of Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 59 of 2012 registered under Section 135 of the Electricity Act, has prayed for quashing of the aforesaid FIR to the extent of his interest. 2. Sushree Manisha, an Assistant Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply Sub-Division, Rosera, Distt- Samastipur filed a written report on 19.03.2012 disclosing therein that on the same day, a raiding party was constituted comprising of Sri Satya Narayan Mehta, Executive Engineer, Sri Sunil Kumar Verma, C.O.-cum-Magistrate, Bibhutipur, she herself, Sri K.P. Singh, ASI, Vibhutipur P.S., Sri Amarjit Paswan, Technician and conducted raid at the premises of different persons on getting information regarding stealthily consuming electric power and have shown conduction of raid in the house of Dilip Mahto and Naresh Sharma with regard to status of petitioner, it has been disclosed that after getting confidential information, they conducted...
Tag this Judgment!Motak Yadav @ Awadh Bihari Yadav and Others Vs. the State of Bihar and ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-03-2014
1. By judgment and order, dated 30th November, 2006, passed, in Sessions Trial No. 89 of 1997, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. IV, Buxar, all the accused-appellants stand convicted under Sections 304(Part-II) and 341 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. By the impugned judgment and order, all the accused-appellants, except accused-appellant, Ram Bihari Yadav, also stand convicted under Sections 147 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code; whereas accused-appellant, Ram Bihari Yadav, has been convicted under Sections 148 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code. Following their conviction, as mentioned hereinbefore, under Section 304 (Part-II) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, all the accused-appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years each and to also undergo, for their conviction under Section 341 of the Indian Penal Code, simple imprisonment for a period of one month each. Following their convictio...
Tag this Judgment!Biti Mian and Others Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-03-2014
Oral Judgment: Heard learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties. This Appeal has been preferred by the 10 appellants against their conviction for the offence under Section 365/34 IPC and sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and, appellant nos. 9,2 and 3 namely, Ram Ishwar Ram, Diljan Mian and Jai Mangal Tiwary respectively were also convicted for the offence under Section 148 IPC and sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year remaining were convicted for the offence under Section 147 IPC and sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and, appellant no.1, Biti Mian was also convicted for the offence under section 354 IPC and sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. However, the sentences are to run concurrently as awarded on 10th September 2001 by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhojpur at Arrah in Sessions Trial No. 1 of 1990, arising out of Agiaon P.S. Case No. 22 of 1987. The appellants were charged f...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›