Court : Patna
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ application the petitioner has prayed for the following relief: œa. For issuance of an appropriate Writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent State to produce the said notification by which the private respondent Shri Kishor Kunal has been nominated the member of the State Govt. in the search committee for appointment on the post of Vice Chancellor and Pro-Vice Chancellor in Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University and after production of the same issue a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the same. b. For issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the part of the press release dated 22.10.2013 (Annexure 3) issued by the GovernorŸs Secretariat, Bihar so far as it relates to constitution of Search Committee for recommending Panels of names for the post of Vice Chancellor and Pro-Vice Chancellor of Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University is concerned. c. For ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
I.A. Ansari, J. 1. Under challenge, in the present appeals, are the judgment, dated 13.01.2014, of conviction, in Sessions Trial No.242 of 1987, by learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge II, Vaishali at Hajipur, and the order, dated 18.01.2014, whereby sentences have been passed against all the accused-appellants. 2. By the impugned judgment, the learned trial Court has convicted all the accused-appellants, except accused-appellant, Kameshwar Singh, namely, (i) Uday Kumar Singh @ Uday Singh, (ii) Ranjeet Choudhary, (iii) Ram Babu Singh, (iv) Sachitanand Singh @ Sachchidanand Singh, (v) Sanjay singh, (vi) Kapildeo Singh, (vii) Sunil Kumar Singh, and (viii) Surendra Singh, under Sections 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Following their conviction under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, the accused-appellants, namely, (i) Uday Kumar Singh @ Uday Singh, (ii) Ranjeet Choudhary, (iii) Ram Babu Singh, (iv) Sachitanand Singh @ Sachchidanand Singh,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
I.A. Ansari, J. 1. By the judgment and order, dated 05.06.2006, passed, in Sessions Trial No. 781 of 2003, by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. II, Jamui, the appellant, Kamli Devi, stands convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Following her conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, the accused-appellant, Kamli Devi, has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. 2. The case of the prosecution may, in brief, be described thus: (i) On the night of 2nd June, 2003, when Prakash Yadav (since deceased) was sleeping, on a cot, with his brother, Dharmendra Yadav (PW 8) and their father, Bhikho Yadav, Prakash Yadav cried out of pain. Shocked by his cries, PW 8 (Dharmendra Yadav) woke up and so woke up his father, Bhikho Yadav. In order to find out as to what had happened to Prakash Yadav, PW 8 (Dharmendra Yadav) switched on a torch-light and noticed, in the focus of the torch-light that, while Prakash Yadav was writhing in pain, accused, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Appellants Lalo Chaudhary, Upendra Chaudhary, Rajo Chaudhary, Maheshwar Chaudhary, Sachidanand Chaudhary, Debo Chaudhary, Yogendra Chaudhary who have been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the IPC, directing each of them to under go R.I. for life, under Section 148 IPC where for each of them independently directed to undergo RI for one year. Appellant Lalo Chaudhary held guilty for an offence punishable under Section 323 of the IPC and directed to undergo RI for six month with a direction to run the sentences concurrently vide judgment dated 27th March, 1990 passed by Sessions Judge, Saharsa in Sessions Trial No.49 of 1986 have preferred instant appeal. 2. Daso Mehta (P.W.6) recorded First Information Report on 19.06.1985 at 09:00 AM at Police Station disclosing therein that yesterday while his son Rajendra Mehta was harvesting maize crop from a field which they have taken on Batai from Sheo Ratan Bhagat along with his wife while wife of Upendra Chaudhar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 329/2012 wherein Raghu Yadav @ Rogha Yadav @ Amlesh Kumar Yadav happens to be appellant and Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 215/2012 wherein Rutan Yadav happens to be appellant commonly originate from the judgment of conviction dated 18.02.2012 whereby and whereunder both the appellants have been found guilty for offence punishable under Sections 396 and 397 of the IPC and order dated 22.02.2012 whereby each of them has been directed to undergo RI for 10 years as well as fined Rs.5,000/- in default thereof to undergo additional imprisonment of three months under Section 396 of the IPC, RI for 8 years under Section 397 of the IPC with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently by Additional Sessions Judge, FTC-6, Saharsa in Sessions Trial No. 21/2010, challenged the same under present respective appeals and on account thereof, have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment. 2. PW-8, Mantun Yadav had recorded his Fard-e-beyan on 17.06.200 at...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
This Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent preferred by the respondent no.9 arises from the judgment and order dated 16th September 2010 passed by the learned single Judge in CWJC No.12054 of 2010. The matter relates to appointment of Panchayat Shiksha Mitra under the Gram Panchayat Mohiuddinpur, P.S. Hansa, District-Samastipur under the then prevalent Scheme (hereinafter referred to as žthe SchemeŸ) and absorption as Panchayat Teacher under the Bihar Panchayat Elementary Teacher (Employment and Service Conditions) Rules, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as œthe Rules of 2006?). The respondent no.10 Prashant Kumar approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution in CWJC No.12054 of 2010 to challenge the order dated 26th June 2010 made by the District Magistrate, Samastipur in Miscellaneous Case No.1 of 2010 and the order of cancellation of his appointment made by the Gram Panchayat on 1st January 2009. It appears that as early as in April 2003, the writ ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Appellant Ajay Sadai has preferred instant appeal against the judgment dated 16.04.2012 whereby he has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 376 of the I.P.C. and sentence dated 18.04.2012 directing to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years as well as also fined of Rs. Ten thousand in default thereof, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months additionally by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga in Sessions Trial No.521 of 2010/1266 of 2010. 2. PW-9 Shibo Devi gave her fard-bayan on 11.07.2010 at about 1.00 p.m. at her house disclosing therein that her husband Naresh Sadai had gone to Tamil Nadu to earn his livelihood. She resides along with her son Manish Kumar aged about 4 years and a daughter Sanju Kumari aged about 2 years. She used to go for daily wages after giving meal to her children. Her children are being cared by Renu Kumari aged about 8 years, daughter of her sister. Today, at about 9.00 a.m. while she along with others had gone to Gho...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
I.A. Ansari, J 1. Under challenge, in the present appeals, are the judgment of conviction, dated 28.07.2007, in Sessions Trial No. 91 of 1992, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. II, Khagaria, and the order, dated 30.07.2007, whereby various sentences have been passed against the accused-appellants. 2. By the impugned judgment, learned trial Court has convicted all the accused-appellants, under Sections 342, 323 and 307 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned trial Court has also convicted the accused-appellants, namely, Mahendra Tanti and Ram Sharesh Tanti, under Sections 302 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned trial Court has further convicted the accused-appellants, namely, Bhadai Tanti, Chandra Deo Tanti and Bhujangi Tanti, under Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial Court has also convicted the accused-appellant, namely, Mahendra Tanti, under Section 148 of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
1. Appellants Naga Yadav @ Nag Yadav, Shyam Babu Yadav @ Shyam Babu and Pramod Yadav have been found guilty for an offence punishable under Section 364/34 of the I.P.C. vide judgment of conviction dated 13.11.2013 and each one has been directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years as well as fined of Rs. Five thousand in defualt thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months additionally vide order of sentence dated 21.11.2013 by the Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge-1st, Patna in Sessions Trial no.695 of 2006 have challenged the same under instant appeal. 2. PW-6 Ajay Kumar filed a written report on 11.06.2005 alleging inter alia that he happens to be proprietor of Star Bright Musical Group, wherein Pramod Kumar Yadav was also engaged. Few days ago, he had taken away cash from his office and on account thereof, a case was registered against him. Today i.e. 11.06.2005 at evening hour while was going to Hilsa along with group members and as soon as the vehicle reach...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
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!