Court : Patna
Reported in : 2010CriLJ292
Navin Sinha and Dharnidhar Jha, JJ.1. The two appellants, namely, Surendra Manjhi and Saryug Manjhi were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No. II, Nalanda at Biharsharif, with eight other accused persons for different charges, in Sessions Trial No. 818 of 2005/210 of 2007. The trial ended in judgment dated 6th of June, 2008. While the two appellants were found having committed offences under Sections 147, 148, 458, 120B, 302, 307, 380, 332, 333, 353, 341, 436, 342 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, besides, Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act and Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, the other accused persons facing trial with the two appellants were not found having committed any offence under the Penal Code as also the Arms Act, and accordingly, they were acquitted. The order of sentence was passed by the learned trial court on 9.6.2008 and after hearing both the sides under Section 235 of the Code of Crim...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
J.B. Koshy, C.J.1. The challenge in this writ application is against the order of the Managing Director of the Bihar State Beverages Corporation Ltd ('the Corporation', in short) directing recovery of amounts from the running business of the petitioner for payment of the same to the fifth respondent. According to the petitioner, the order is unfair, arbitrary, unreasonable, intended to enrich the fifth respondent without any authority of law, without jurisdiction and against the provisions of the Liquor Sourcing Policy ('the Liquor Policy', for brevity).2. The Corporation was established by the State Government as a fully owned Government company entrusted with the monopolistic privilege of wholesale supply of liquor in the State of Bihar. The Corporation had framed its own policy and incorporated terms and conditions in the agreement executed between the manufacturers and suppliers of liquor. Annexure - 1 is the liquor policy of 2006 which was executed by the petitioner and the fifth ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
J.B. Koshy, C.J.1. On 22.7.2007, the East Central Railway invited tenders for the construction of several residential units, staff quarters and other miscellaneous works at Sonepur/Hajipur. The estimated cost of the project was Rs. 106788840.20 paise. The tender stipulated price variation clause in Chapter - 3. Clause 34 of the said terms and conditions provides for price variation. Clause 34(A) is the general conditions for price variation. Clause 34(C) stipulates ceiling on price variation. As per Clause 34(C)(i), the adjustment ie. reimbursements/recovery based on price indices, shall be made only if to the extent the amount to be adjusted is in excess of 5% of the amount payable to the contractor as per accepted rates. As per Clause 34(C)(ii), the total amount of adjustments ie. increase/decrease in the payment to the contractor shall be limited to 10% ie. (15% - 5% (floor price)) of the amount finally payable to the contractor as per accepted rates for the contracts where the peri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. Both Cr. Rev. No. 147-09 and No. 477/09 are taken up together, as in both the cases the petitioner and the opposite party are the same and they arise out of the same P.S. case, namely, Hisua P.S. Case No. 116 of 2006, dated 14.12.06 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307 and 379 of the I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act to which Section 302 of the I.P.C. was added later on.3. The main issue in this case is as to whether Magistrate after submission of the chargesheet and cognizance, is competent to make an enquiry with respect to identity of an accused.4. Before I deal with the issue, the facts are being noticed in brief. The informant, Kamlesh Yadav @ Doma Yadav, lodged an F.I.R. bearing Hisua P.S. Case No. 116/06, under Section 302 and other allied sections of the I.P.C. In the aforesaid F.I.R., eleven persons have been named including one Uma Yadav and Dinesh Yadav both sons of Bacchu Yadav. The police...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Reported in : 2009(57)BLJR2281
Sudhir Kumar Katriar, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 4.7.2001 (Annexure-9), passed by the learned Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, Patna, in Revision Case No. 32 of 2000 (Sanjay Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar and Ors.), in purported exercise of powers under Sub-section (3) of Section 32 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), whereby he has rejected the revision application preferred by the present petitioner, and has refused to entertain the prayer for substitution of the heirs of the land-holder.2. The facts are not in dispute and may be indicated to the extent needed for disposal of the present writ petition. The genealogy of the parties may be set out hereinbelow:2.1. Land Ceiling proceedings under the Act were initiated against Debbala Singh, the petitioner's grand-mother. The chronology of events as provided in the writ petition may be reproduced hereinbelo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.1. Both these two writ applications are by the same Company against the same respondents and in relation to similar work involving the same dispute and, as such, with consent of parties, have been taken up together and heard for final disposal on merits at this stage itself.2. The dispute essentially is with regard to compensation payable in relation to cost escalations during period of contract. Petitioner wants implementation of the policy of Railway Board dated 28.09.2007 which, under certain circumstances, removed barrier on price escalation, the agreement amongst parties being subsequent thereto and the Railway contends that the policy would apply only to future contracts thereby meaning to tenders which are floated after policy.3. As the facts are similar in both the writ petitions, in material particulars relevant for decision, the facts of the first case being CWJC No. 16459 of 2008 are being noted in detail. The two writ petitions, for the sake brevit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Counsel appearing for Respondent No. 1 and learned Counsels for the State Election Commission and for Respondent Nos. 4 to 7.2. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 11.7.2007 passed by Munsif 2nd Court, Saran in Election Case No. 6 of 2006 (Surya Narayan Rai v. The Chief Election Commissioner and Ors.) through which he has allowed the application for addition of Respondent No. 1 as the party to the election petition filed by him and also by other contesting candidate. The further prayer is to issue a mandamus commanding the respondents to discharge their legal obligation and to declare the Election Case No. 6 of 2006 as not maintainable since it suffers from non-joinder of necessary party within the time frame allowed in Rule 106 of the Bihar Panchayat Election Rules, 2006.3. The petitioner was a candidate for the post of Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat, Raj Mukimpur in 2006 Gram Panchayat Election. The p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Sudhir Kumar Katriar, J.1. This is a batch of 13 writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, questioning the validity of the selection process of the Bihar Administrative Service First Limited Competitive Examination 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Selection Process'), conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'BPSC'). All the writ petitions (except Cr.WJC No. 583 of 2007 and CWJC No. 16093 of 2007) have been preferred by unsuccessful candidates, some of whom want cancellation of the selection process from the stage of the advertisement, some other want the selection process from the post-advertisement stage and fresh examination to be held, and still others want the selection process to be upheld and preparation of fresh merit list in accordance with law after excluding the charge-sheeted candidates. Cr.WJC No. 583 of 2007 has been preferred by the successful candidates and pray for the direction that the investigation may b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Shiva Kirti Singh, J.1. The Death Reference is in respect of the six accused who have been tried together and convicted for the offence under Sections 364(A), 302, 201 and 120(B) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused Gorakh Singh alias Gorakh Nath Singh has been sentenced to death for the offence under Section 302 read with 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code whereas the remaining five accused have been sentenced to death for the offence under Section 364(A) of the Indian Penal Code. No separate sentence has been awarded to them for other offences. Accused, Gorakh Singh alias Gorakh Nath Singh and his son, accused Sunny alias Sunny Deol have jointly preferred Cr. Appeal No. 1216 of 2007 whereas the remaining four accused, Ravindra Kumar alias Ravindra Kumar Singh, Ravi Chor alias Ravi Rai, Neeraj Kumar and Santosh Kumar alias Loha have preferred separate Criminal Appeals bearing No. 1085, 1173, 1194, and 1275 all of 2007 respectively. The Death Reference and the Criminal ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Shiva Kirti Singh, J.1. The Death Reference is in respect of the six accused who have been tried together and convicted for the offence under Sections 364(A), 302, 201 and 120(B) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused Gorakh Singh @ Gorakh Nath Singh has been sentenced to death for the offence under Section 302 read with 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code whereas the remaining five accused have been sentenced to death for the offence under Section 364(A) of the Indian Penal Code. No separate sentence has been awarded to them for other offences. Accused, Gorakh Singh @ Gorakh Nath Singh and his son, accused Sunny @ Sunny Deol have jointly preferred Cr. Appeal No. 1216 of 2007 whereas the remaining four accused, Ravindra Kumar @ Ravindra Kumar Singh, Ravi Chor @ Ravi Rai, Neeraj Kumar and Santosh Kumar @ Loha have preferred separate Criminal Appeals bearing No. 1085, 1173, 1194 and 1275 all of 2007 respectively. The Death Reference and the Criminal Appeals have been heard t...
Tag this Judgment!