Court : Patna
1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant Rajiv Singh against the judgment of conviction dated 21.10.2011 whereunder, he has been found guilty for an offence punishable under Sections 304B, 201, 498A of the I.P.C. and sentence dated 25.10.2011 directing to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years under Section 304B of the I.P.C., rigorous imprisonment for two years as well as also slapped with fine appertaining to Rs. Five thousand in default thereof, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month additionally under Section 201 of the I.P.C., rigorous imprisonment for two years as well as also fined Rs. Five thousand in default thereof, to undergo S.I. for one month additionally, under Section 498A of the I.P.C. with a further direction to run the sentences concurrently. 2. After hearing both sides as well as going through the record, certain admitted fact is to be taken note of for better appreciation. Appellant Rajiv Singh happens to be the husband of Rani Archana Sinha (so...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Reported in : AIR2009Pat183
Shiva Kirti Singh, A.C.J.1. The issue referred to the Full Bench for adjudication at the very initial stage of filing of present appeals is whether these appeals under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), preferred against the judgment and order of a Family Court should be treated and recorded as First Appeal or as Miscellaneous Appeal. This issue being an issue of law does not require going into the facts of the appeals.2. However, some facts which may be helpful in deciding the issue in question, relate to Miscellaneous Appeal No. 191 of 2009 and are noticed in brief. This appeal has been filed against an order dated 19-2-2009 passed in Misc. Case No. 11 of 2000 by Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffarpur whereby and whereunder the judgment and decree dated 7-10-1966 obtained by the appellant's husband against the private respondent, the wife of the appellant has been set aside on accepting the plea of the respondent wife that the ex par...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.1. The present Government appeal has been filed under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the State of Bihar against the Judgment and order of acquittal dated 18.12.2006 passed by Shri Munni Lal Paswan. Special Judge, CBI (AHD). Patna in Special Case No. 5 of 1998 by which the learned Special Judge has acquitted both the accused Dersons on the charge of possessing assets disproportionate to the known sources Of ihcoma so far as the respondent No. 1 is concerned and on the charge of abetting the same with resosct to respondent No. 2. The charges had been framed under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against the respondent No. 1. Lalu Prasad Yadav and under Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 against respondent No. 2. Smt. Rabri Devi.2. After hearing learned Counsel for the appellant and learned Counsel for the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
B.N.P. Singh, J.1. This refers to Death Reference No. 6 of 2000 sent to this Court for confirmation of sentence and also Cr. Appeal No. 515 of 2000, preferred by the convict-'appellant raising a question of defence of insanity for an offence of matricide under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and also questioning the legality and validity of the order of conviction and capital sentence, as recorded against him by the learned 12th Additional District & Sessions Judge, Saran, Chapra, in Sessions Trial No. 318 of 1993. Gravamen of the charges against the appellant was about chopping off both the hands and head of his mother, pursuant to which, he was apprehended by the Police and also the public while carrying the cut parts of the body, of his mother, kept in a gunny bag. The appellant allegedly confessed his guilt before the Police and public, pursuant to which, prosecution was launched against him and the trial eventually commenced for consideration of his guilt. In the midst of tr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Aftab Alam, J.1. These two proceedings before the Full Bench are on reference made under Section 89(2) of the Bihar Re-organisation Act, 2000. The object of the reference is to determine whether by virtue of Section 89(1) of the Act the criminal cases, commonly known as the Animal Husbandry Scam cases, stand transferred to the Court in Jharkhand, the newly-created State of Jharkhand, or whether those cases would continue to proceed before the Special Court at Patna where they were instituted and where they have been hitherto proceeding. According to Section 89(1) of the Act upon the creation of the State of Jharkhand, every proceeding pending before a Court in this State shall stand transferred to the corresponding Court in Jharkhand if it is a proceeding relating exclusively to the territory of Jharkhand. Subsection (2) of Section 89 provides that if a question arises as to whether any proceeding should stand transferred under Sub-section (1), it would be referred to the Patna High C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
N. Pandey, J.1. This appeal by M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited (defendant) is directed against the Judgment and decree passed by the Sub-ordinate Judge, 2nd Court. Dhanbad, in Money Suit No. 18 of 1986, whereby and whereunder, the plaintiffs suit was decreed in part for Rs. 34,63,950/- (rupees thirty four lacs sixty three thousand nine hundred and fifty) coupled with damages at the rate of Rs. 175/-per month per decimal so long the defendant retains the possession of the suit land or regular sate deed was executed by the plaintiff.2. In short, the case of the plaintiff is that he acquired 20-16 Acres of land comprising of various plots under Khata Nos. 1 and 2 at Mouza-Durgapur within Jharia Police Station in the district of Dhanbad for valuable consideration by virtue of the registered deed of sale dated 16-2-1970 and 8-6-1979 from Jiv Rai M, Patel Narasi R. Chodwa, Khem Shankar Jain and Smt. Gomati Ben Kharfeha and since then he had been coming in possession over the same. The acqui...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Asok Kumar Ganguly, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 30-12-1998 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Patna in O.A. No. 4/97. 2. It appears that an application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act. 1993 (hereinafter called the said Act) was filed against the petitioner by respondent No. 1 which is Allahabad Bank, Bokaro Steel City Branch, Naya More, Bokaro, Bihar (hereinafter called the said Bank). In the said application the said Bank as an applicant has made out a case that the petitioner No. 1, a Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Bakaro, approached the said Bank through its Director for Cash credit Limit of rupees one lac for working capital and submitted its application for the same. The said Bank sanctioned the said cash credit limit of rupees one lac against the hypothecation of stocks and book debt payable on demand with Interest specifie...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
R.A. Sharma, J.1. By these writ petitions, the petitioners have challenged the validity of the Bihar Coal Mining Area Development Authority (Amendment) Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as the Amendment Act) and the rules framed thereunder, namely, the Bihar Mineral Area Development Authority (Land Use Tax) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). The prayer seeking appropriate writ and/or order declaring Section 89 of the Bihar Coal Mining Area Development Authority Act, 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as amended by the Amendment Act as ultra vires is also there. Consequential and incidential relief seeking quashing of the demand notice, assessment order and the notice requiring filing of returns has also been claimed.2. As the controversy involved in all these writ petitions is the same, it is not necessary to State the facts of each of these petitions excepting the writ petition, C.W.J.C. No 783 of 1994(R) (Central Coal Field Ltd. v. The State of Bihar and Or...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1997)63ITD257(Pat.)
1. The decision of the Appellate Commissioner (A/C) in the impugned order is challenged in this appeal by the assessee. Various issues culled out from the grounds taken and which have arisen for our consideration are : (a) Whether the Assessing Officer was justified in issuing notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for failure of the assessee in filing return disclosing investment made during the previous year in the construction of the Hotel Building (b) Whether the Assessing Officer was justified in assuming jurisdiction under section 144 of the Act and completing the assessment ex parte (c) Whether the assessment is barred by limitation as provided in section 153 of the Act (d) Whether, on the basis of the report of the Departmental Valuation Officer (DVO), the Assessing Officer can make addition under section 69 as income from undisclosed sources towards unexplained investment in the construction of the hotel building on the basis of the DVO's report (e) Whether the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna
Reported in : (1997)63ITD181(Pat.)
1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee and a cross appeal filed by the Department. Both are being disposed of by a common order for the sake of convenience.2. The dispute relates to an addition of Rs. 1,37,400 made by the Assessing Officer for unexplained investment in construction of a building under section 69 of the Act. The assessee constructed a hotel complex called "M/s. Shanti Complex" and the investment shown during the year was Rs. 95,440. It is mentioned in the assessment order that the total cumulative investment up to the year was shown at Rs. 9,94,522, but this figure has been challenged by the ld. counsel for the assessee as incorrect and the correct figure is stated to be Rs. 5,02,656. The assessee admittedly did not maintain proper books of account for the construction and, therefore, the Assessing Officer referred the question of cost of construction to the Departmental Valuation Cell. According to the Valuer's Report, the estimated cost of construction was Rs. 12...
Tag this Judgment!