Patna Court March 2014 Judgments
Jai Ram Singh and Another Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
1. The present appeal arises out of judgment dated 19th of July, 2002, passed by learned Presiding Officer, 1st Additional Fast Track Court, Siwan, in Sessions Trial No. 190 of 1991 by which the two appellants, namely, Jai Ram Singh and Suresh Singh were convicted of offence under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years as also to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, else, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. 2. The occurrence took place on 15.06.1990 at 9 A.M. and as per the prosecution case, the two appellants were about to raise a Palani on the informants land who objected to the acts of the appellants upon which appellant Jai Ram Singh is said to have gone back to his house hurriedly abusing the informant P.W. 5 Ram Nath Singh to come back with a Bhala and by uttering that the informant be killed, gave a blow with the weapon which pierced into the stomach of the informant. Ram Nath Singh...
Tag this Judgment!Pradeep Choudhary Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-05-2014
1. Six accused persons, namely, Pradeep Choudhary (appellant), Manoj Kumar Choudhary, Babu Lal Choudhary, Dilip Choudhary, Dinesh Choudhary and Chameli Devi were put on trial by the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Munger after being indicted of committing the offences under sections 147 and 302/149 of the I.P.C. out of whom the present appellant Pradeep Choudhary was specifically charged for committing the offence under section 302 I.P.C. By judgment dated 2nd August, 2002 and all the accused persons were convicted of the charge under section 302/149 I.P.C. and as regards present appellant, his conviction was recorded under section 304 part-II I.P.C. After being heard on sentence the appellant was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for eight years and was also directed to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in case of having defaulted in making payment of fine the appellant was to suffer rigorous imprisonment additional for a period of one year. The appellant Pradeep Choudhary ch...
Tag this Judgment!Laldeo Paswan and Others Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-04-2014
Dharnidhar Jha : Smt. Meena Singh and Shri Ashutosh Ranjan Pandey, Advocate, appear in Cr.Appeal Nos. 383 and 396 of 2002. None appears in the remaining two connected appeals. The court has requested Shri Neeraj Kumar and Smt. Uma Kumari, who are present in Court room to assist me in Amicus Curiae. The present batch of four appeals arise out of judgment dated 3.7.2002 passed by the learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad in Sessions Trial no. 318 of 1999/ 304 of 2001.By the impugned judgment, the five appellants were held guilty of committing offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code and after being heard on sentence each of them was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years. Appellants- Arjun Rajwar and Ravidnra Paswan were also convicted under Section 412 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them were directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years on that count. Sentences were directed to run concurrently. The case related to an incident da...
Tag this Judgment!Ramanuj Singh and Another Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-04-2014
Dharnidhar Jha, J: The two appellants Ramanuj Singh and Mina Devi, spouses between them and parents in law of the deceased and in-laws of the deceased Pallavi Mehta, were charged with committing offences under Sections 304B and 498A of the Indian Penal Code by the 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Patna, in Sessions Trial no. 63 of 2001 and by judgment dated 12.8.2002 they were convicted of committing the offences. The appellants were heard on 14.8.2002 under Section 235 Cr.P.C. and each of them were directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years as also for two years each respectively on the counts of their conviction. This is how they have preferred the present appeal to challenge the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed upon them. Some of the undisputed facts may be noticed. Pallavi Mehta was married to Rajesh Kumar, the son of the two appellants on 21.2.1997. She was residing on the date of occurrence in her matrimonial house. As appears from the evidence as als...
Tag this Judgment!Bikrama Singh Son of Indrashan Singh and Others Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-03-2014
1. There were originally eleven accused persons named in the FI.R. which was drawn up on the basis of the fardbeyan of the Informant Kameshwar Singh (P.W.4) recorded in Sadar Hospital, Chapra on 19.7.1985. The same number of accused persons were sent up for trial and during which accused Ram Janam Singh died leaving the trial only against ten accused persons, who were ultimately found guilty and convicted of committing offence under section 307 of the I.P.C. Each of the ten accused persons who were covered by the impugned judgment except appellant Singhashan Singh were directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment of seven years and also to pay fine of Rs. 1000/- each, else, to suffer simple imprisonment for six months. So far appellant Singhashan Singh is concerned, he was found aged about 95 years and as such his term of imprisonment was reduced to that of three years but the same quantum of fine was maintained against him with similar condition of serving sentence of simple imprisonment ...
Tag this Judgment!Bijay Yadav @ Bijay Singh Yadav and Others Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-03-2014
1. The present appeal arises out of judgment of conviction dated 10th of April, 2002, passed by the learned Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as the œAct?), in Trial No. 6 of 2000, by which the learned trial judge held the three appellants guilty of committing offences under Section 435/34 of the Indian Penal Code as also under Section 3(2)(III) of the above noted special Act. While passing sentence upon the appellants, the learned trial judge directed each of the three appellants to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 435/34 of the Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 3(2)(iii) of the Act. After having directed that the sentences shall run concurrently, it appears, the learned Special Judge was imposing a sentence of fine without clarifying as to under what provision of the penal law the appellants were liable to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- each and in cas...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›