Patna Court May 2014 Judgments
Vivekanand Prasad Vs. the State of Bihar and Another
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-07-2014
1. Petitioner who along with others, has been made an accused of Patna Harijan P.S. Case No.23 of 1998 registered under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474/120B IPC and 3(1)(i)(iv)/3(2)(vii) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has asked for quashing of the aforesaid FIR relating to his interest. 2. Opposite Party No.2, Ramesh Kumar Singh, Inspector of Police-cum-Officer-in-charge, Harijan Police Station, Patna has recorded his own fardbeyan on account of divulgences of fact that after getting forged and fabricated caste certificate of Scheduled Caste / Tribe the accused named therein including the petitioner got themselves admitted under quota so prescribed therefor at different medical colleges. 3. It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that arraying him as an accused in the present FIR is bad and contrary to spirit of the law because of the fact that the same happens to be hit by double jeopardy and is violative of Article 20(2) o...
Tag this Judgment!Anil Kumar Mahto and Others Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-07-2014
S.P. Singh, J. 1. Under challenge, in the present appeals, are the judgment, dated 11.06.2008, of conviction, in Sessions Trial No. 243 of 1997, by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. V, Begusarai, and the order, dated 13.06.2008, whereby various sentences have been passed against the accused-appellants. 2. By the impugned judgment, the learned trial Court has convicted the accused-appellant, Anil Kumar Mahto @ Kunnan Mahto, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. The accused-appellant, Siyaram Mahto, has been, under the impugned judgment, convicted under Sections 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 302 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code and 341 of the Indian Penal Code. So far as the remaining three accused-appellants, namely, Birendra Mahto, Surendra Mahto and Manoj Mahto are concerned, they have been, under the impugned judgment, convicted under Sections 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Pen...
Tag this Judgment!Munni Noniya and Others Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-07-2014
I.A. Ansari, J 1. Under challenge, in the present appeals, is the judgment, dated 27.11.2013, of conviction, in Sessions Trial No. 422 of 2003/21 of 2012, by the learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge V, Gaya, and the order, dated 30.11.2013, whereby various sentences have been passed against the accused-appellants. 2. By the impugned judgment, learned trial Court has convicted all the accused-appellants, except accused-appellant, Deo Nandan Noniya, under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned trial Court has convicted the accused-appellant, Deo Nandan Noniya, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. For their conviction, under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, all the accused-appellants, except Deo Nandan Noniya, have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- each and, in default of payment of fine, suffer simple imprisonment for two months. For his conviction under Section 302 of the Ind...
Tag this Judgment!Rajesh Gupta and Others Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-07-2014
1. Appellants Beer Narain Gupta, Gauri Devi of Cr. Appeal No.247 of 2011 as well as appellant Rajesh Gupta of Cr. Appeal No.308 of 2011 have been found guilty for an offence punishable under Sections 304B, 201 of the I.P.C. as well as each of them has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 304B of the I.P.C., rigorous imprisonment for three years as well as fined appertaining to Rs. One thousand in default thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months additionally under Section 201 of the I.P.C. by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Purnia vide judgment of conviction and sentence dated 10.02.2011 in Sessions Trial No.478 of 2009/ 02 of 2011 challenged the same and on account thereof, have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment. 2. PW-5 Shivji Prasad had recorded first information report on 04.06.2006 at about 4.45 p.m. at Banmankhi P.S. disclosing therein that he has superannuated from Army. He has two sons...
Tag this Judgment!Ashwini Choudhary and Another Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-06-2014
I.A. Ansari, J. 1. Under challenge, in the present appeals, are the judgment, dated 10.07.2009, passed, in Sessions Trial No. 654 of 2007, by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1, Banka, and the order, dated 20.07.2009, whereby various sentences have been passed against the accused-appellants. 2. By the impugned judgment, learned trial Court has convicted the accused-appellant, Ashwini Choudhary, under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and accused-appellant, Pawan Choudhary, under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. Following his conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the accused-appellant, Ashwini Choudhary, has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. Following his conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, the accused-appellant, Pawan Choudhary, too, has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. This apart, consequent upon his conviction...
Tag this Judgment!Kant Dubey and Others Vs. Brij Mohan Pandey and Others
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-06-2014
1. Heard Mr. J.S. Arora, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the defendant-appellants and Mr. A.B. Ojha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the plaintiff-respondents. 2. This second appeal has been filed assailing the judgment and decree passed by the appellate court below affirming the decree in the suit in favour of the plaintiff-respondents. 3. The plaintiffs instituted the T.S. No. 56 of 1994 praying for the relief of declaration of their title over the suit land described in schedule-Ka of the plaint and further for confirmation of their possession over the same and in alternative for recovery of possession if dispossessed during the pendency of the suit. Later on, by amendment in the plaint, the plaintiffs added the fact of their dispossession from the suit land by the defendants during the pendency of the suit. The consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in peaceful possession of the plaintiffs over the suit land ha...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Sah Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-05-2014
1. Sole appellant, Ashok Sah has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Sections 22 (C) of the NDPS Act vide judgment dated 30.03.2012 and sentenced to undergo RI for 10 years as well as also slapped with fine appertaining to Rs. 1 Lac in default thereof, to undergo SI for two years additionally vide order dated 31.03.2012 by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, NDPS Act, West Champaran at Bettiah in Shikarpur P.S. Case No. 281/2006, G.R. No.2757/2006, Trial No. 08/2007 has challenged the same by preferring instant appeal. 2. PW-8, Satyendra Prasad Singh, Officer-in-charge of Shikarpur P.S. recorded his own fard-e-beyan on 20.06.2006 at about 3:00 p.m. at Shikarpur disclosing therein that on the same day at about 10:00 a.m., he received a confidential information with regard to transportation of Ganja over Swaraj Tractor and trailer having no registration number scribed over the Tractor or trailer towards Mathura Chowk and on account thereof, a raiding party ...
Tag this Judgment!Most. Shobha Devi and Others Vs. the United India Insurance Co.Ltd. an ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-05-2014
1. The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 26.5.2009 passed in M.A.C. no. 4 of 2009/2 of 2008 by the Additional District Judge cum Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Jehanabad, whereby the claim for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act has been dismissed. 2. The brief fact of the case is that on 29.6.2004 at about 10 P.M. the deceased Sunil Kumar along with other villagers went near the vehicle in question ( Mahindra Commandar Jeep ) bearing registration no. BR-25-2274 to rescue the same as it got fire due to terrorists attack and during the course of extinguishing fire the oil tanki of the vehile burst out as a result of which the deceased Sunil Kumar and others got burn injury. The deceased was immediately taken to Jehanabad Sadar Hospital and thereafter he was referred to Appolo Burns Hospital, Patna, where he died during the course of treatment. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that admittedly the deceased got burn injury out of the fire c...
Tag this Judgment!Shobha Devi @ Masomat Shobha Rani and Another Vs. Most. Mala Devi and ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-05-2014
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for respondent no. 3. 2. Respondent nos. 1 and 2, the owners of the vehicle have not appeared even after service of notice. 3. The claimants-appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 19.01.2005 and award dated 11.2.2005 passed by the learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Bhagalpur in Accident Claim Case No. 15 of 1991 by which respondent nos. 1 and 2 the owners of the offending vehicle have been directed to make payment of the amount of compensation to the claimants. 4. The case of the claimants-appellants, in brief, is that Suman Kumar Pathak (deceased) aged about 27 years earning Rs.36000/- per annum was the driver of the ill-fated vehicle bearing Registration No. BR 8M-1739 which was owned by respondent nos. 1 and 2 and insured by respondent no. 3 had met with an accident, fell in the ditch causing the death of the driver, conductor and helper of the aforesaid bu...
Tag this Judgment!Shambhu Nath Pathak Vs. Kanti Devi
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-02-2014
The present Appeal has been filed against order dated 02.04.2007 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court at Aurangabad in Matrimonial Case No. 03 of 1992/97 of 2006 preferred by the Appellant seeking divorce. The parties were married on 22.04.1984. On that date they were approximately 17 and 16 years of age respectively. The respondent stayed in the matrimonial home till February, 1985 only. She returned on 05.04.1988. A Male and Female child were born. The male child did not survive. The respondent expressed desire to continue with her studies and went back to the parental home on 06.04.1988 never to return. The Appellant filed suit for divorce alleging that she had adulterous relation with another contending that the girl child was born from that relationship. The Principal Judge disbelieved the allegations of adultery but noticed as a matter of fact that relations between the parties had been soured to an extent that there coming together did not appear possible. In the meantime...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »