Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : May-15-2008
Reported in : [2008(3)JCR23(Jhr)]
..... of lease in favour of m/s. thakur prasad sao.45. it has been submitted that the respondents, being the welfare state, they are expected to act reasonably, fairly and legally, but they have violated the mandatory provision of law and prescribed procedure. the state government cannot arbitrarily adopt a procedure against the ..... natural justice?(iii) whether the writ petition is maintainable in view of the alternative statutory remedy under section 30 of the mines and minerals (development & regulation) act, 1957?point no. i7. by order dated 5th december, 2006, while disposing of the petitioner's writ petition, this court had directed the respondents to consider ..... state government to renew the lease, the petitioner filed revision application before the central government under section 30 of the mines and minerals (development and regulation) act in september, 2004.(x) in the meantime, in pursuance of the order dated 1st september, 2004, the state government issued notification under rule 59 of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : May-01-2008
Reported in : [2008(3)JCR195(Jhr)]
ORDERD.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the State.2. The petitioner, who is accused for the offence under Sections 323, 341, 386, 392 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant case is placed entirely on false and concocted allegations and, even as admitted by the complainant himself in the complaint petition, the same complainant had filed a complaint case against the petitioner for the offence under Section 417 of the IPC in which the petitioner was granted bail and being frustrated, the complainant has filed the present com-plaint petition only to harass the petitioner.4. Learned counsel adds that the original grudge of the complainant against the petitioner is that the petitioner happens to be a contender in the matter of acquisition of a piece of land in prime locality. The complainant asserts that he had entered into an agreement of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Jul-18-2008
Reported in : [2008(3)JCR513(Jhr)]
..... society, had offered to take custody of the petitioner and to give him proper care and protection under their control.6. section 12 of the juvenile justice act contains special provision for bail of juveniles in conflict with law and the principle laid down therein is that bail should be granted irrespective of the nature of ..... date of occurrence, his case was forwarded for inquiry and disposal to the juvenile justice board. the petitioner filed his prayer for ball under section 12 of the act but the juvenile justice board vide its' impugned order dated 21.9.2007 rejected his prayer. against the order of rejection, the petitioner preferred appeal before the additional ..... 12.2007 passed by the additional judicial commissioner, xx, ranchi in criminal appeal no. 216 of 2007 whereby the petitioner's appeal filed under section 52 of the act against the order dated 21.9.2007 passed by the juvenile justice board. ranchi rejecting the petitioner's prayer for bail, was dismissed.2. facts of the case .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Aug-13-2008
Reported in : [2008(4)JCR320(Jhr)]
..... has got no role to play, but respondent no. 3 smt. nirija kujur, district education officer, east singhbhum, jamshedpur is interfering with the administration of the school and is also acting mala fide and has threatened coercive action against the petitioner.mr. s. akhtar, appearing for the state, submitted that at the first instance it will be proper that the matter ..... , and preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such representation.it goes without saying that if he finds that respondent no. 3 has been acting in mala fide manner, he will take necessary action after hearing her in accordance with law.till such decision is taken, no coercive step shall be taken against the petitioner .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Aug-04-2008
Reported in : [2008(4)JCR351(Jhr)]
ORDERD.K. Sinha, J.1. The petitioner Shiv Shankar Murmu has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the quashment of the order dated 22.6.2007 passed by the Sessions Judge, Singhbhum West at Chaibasa in Cr. Rev. No. 17 of 2006 whereby and whereunder the order passed in Misc. Case No. 17 of 2001 by the SDJM, Porahat at Chaibasa on 28.2.2006 in a proceeding under Section 125 CrPC directing the petitioner to pay maintenance allowance @ Rs. 2500/- per month to the O.P. No. 2 Piyo Murmu was confirmed.2. The short fact for consideration in the instant case was that the opposite party No. 2 Piyo Murmu had initiated a proceeding under Section 125 of CrPC for grant of monthly maintenance of Rs. 500/- from her husband-petitioner herein on the ground that she was legally married to him on 28.1.1997 according to Santhal customary rites and thereafter both started living together. The marriage was consumated and after one month of thei...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Sep-12-2008
Reported in : [2008(4)JCR618(Jhr)]
..... .2001 corresponding to g.r. no. 155/2001, registered under sections 304-b, 498-a/34 of the indian penal code and under sections 3/4 of the dowry prohibition act which is pending in the court of learned additional chief judicial magistrate, latehar.2. i have heard at length the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner as well as .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Dec-02-2008
Reported in : [2009(1)JCR6(Jhr)]
ORDERAmareshwar Sahay, J.1. Heard the parties.2. The petitioners have challenged the order dated 25.11.2006 passed by the Additional District Judge. Fast Track Court-1, Bokaro in S.T. No. 209 of 1999, whereby the prayer for releasing the forfeited bail amount has been rejected.3. The relevant facts in short, are that these two petitioners stood as bailers of the accused Navin Kumar Tiwari and Mithilesh Kumar in connection with Sessions Trial No. 209/1999. On 18.3.2006, the bail bonds of the accused persons were cancelled and warrant of arrest as well as process under Section 82-83 Cr PC was issued. Thereafter, on 19.4.2006 the bail amount of the sureties were ordered to be forfeited and an order for issuance of distress warrant was also passed. It further appears that both the aforesaid accused persons surrendered in the Court on 7.7.2006 and 28.7.2006 respectively.4. The petitioners are challenging the order issuing forfeiture of bail amounts in this writ application.5. It is submitte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Nov-19-2008
Reported in : [2009(1)JCR201(Jhr)]
ORDERD.G.R. Patnaik, J.1. Both anticipatory bail applications are heard together as both arise out of the same case.2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the State in both the applications.3. Sri R.S. Mazumdar, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners in A.B.A. No. 1983 of 2008 explains that the present case against the petitioners is totally misconceived and as a matter of fact, the petitioners are made accused only because of the fact that they are the contractors to whom the road construction work was allotted by way of tender. The petitioners after having, obtained the work contract, had given the same on sub-contract to other persons namely Satendra Yadav and Manoj Kumar Singh, the petitioners of A.B.A. No. 1387 of 2008. It is further explained that the work of construction of the road was supposed to be carried out by filling Morum Soil and supply of Morum Soil for the road construction work was entrusted to the co-accused Rejendra Yadav. As has...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Dec-18-2008
Reported in : 2009CriLJ1906
..... defrauded the complainant opposite party no. 2 deliberately with malafide intention.3. the trial court convicted the petitioner after full trial for the charge under section 138 of n.i. act and sentenced him undergo s.i. for one year and to pay compensation rupees 1,50,000/- to the complainant. against the aforesaid conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred ..... r. no. 191 of 2007 arising out of c/1 case no. 72 of 2001 by which the trial court has convicted the petitioner under section 138 of n.i. act and sentenced him s.i. for one year and further pay compensation of rs. 1,50,009/- has been affirmed.2. short fact of the case is that the ..... similar circumstances of resolution of disputes between the parties and also on the fact that the offence under section 138 of n.i. act in which petitioner has been convicted, is compoundable under section 147 of the act.6. mr. suraj kumar learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 submitted that the parties have entered into .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jharkhand
Decided on : Dec-18-2008
Reported in : [2009(2)JCR382(Jhr)]
..... , construction of boundary wall and laying deep tube well boring.51. the petitioner at this stage filed an application dated 10.5.2007 (annexure-25) under the 'right to information act' seeking detail regarding the process of allotment of plot no. 6.52. the petitioner, thereafter, filed writ petition being w.p.(c) no. 3021 of 2007 challenging the letter dated .....
Tag this Judgment!