Nominal Index [Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 104-108]Brajkishore Sao V. The State of Jharkhand 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 104Anil Kumar Singh vs State of Jharkhand and Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 105Tata Steel Utilities and Infrastructure Services Limited vs Jharkhand Urban Infrastructure Development Company Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 106 Abhishek Kumar v. The State of Jharkhand 2024 LiveLaw (Jha)...
Nominal Index [Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 104-108]
Brajkishore Sao V. The State of Jharkhand 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 104
Anil Kumar Singh vs State of Jharkhand and Ors 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 105
Tata Steel Utilities and Infrastructure Services Limited vs Jharkhand Urban Infrastructure Development Company Limited 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 106
Abhishek Kumar v. The State of Jharkhand 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 107
Suraj Kumar Mahato and Anr vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited through its Chairman cum Managing Director 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 108
Judgements/Orders This Week
Case Title: Brajkishore Sao V. The State of Jharkhand
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 104
The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that a person seeking the transfer of a license on compassionate grounds must be a dependent of the deceased and must claim the license on compassionate grounds.
While clarifying the application of Clause-11 Cha and Clause-11 Ja of the Jharkhand Targeted Public Distribution System Control Order, 2022, Justice Ananda Sen held, “Clause-11 Cha of the Order, 2022, provides that on compassionate ground, license can be transferred to a dependent of the deceased. Further as per Clause-11 Ja, there is a provision that if there are more claimant for the said license on compassionate ground, “No Objection Certificate” from the other claimants should be obtained. Thus, from the aforesaid provisions, it is clear that the person who is seeking transfer of the said license on compassionate ground must be dependent on the deceased and must claim for the said license on compassionate ground.”
Case Title: Anil Kumar Singh vs State of Jharkhand and Ors
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 105
The Jharkhand High Court has ordered a compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs to be paid to a victim of police brutality, directing the amount to be recovered from the accused officer.
Justice Ananda Sen, presiding over the case, held that the petitioner was wrongfully taken into custody and tortured, mandating the recovery from the responsible police officials within two months of payment.
“Since it is an admitted case that this petitioner was wrongly taken into custody and was tortured, the amount will be recovered from the police officials, who had taken the petitioner in custody and have tortured him. The recovery should be made within two moths from the date of payment,” Justice Sen held.
Case Title: Tata Steel Utilities and Infrastructure Services Limited vs Jharkhand Urban Infrastructure Development Company Limited
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 106
The Jharkhand High Court bench of Acting Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar has held that in Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court is required to see whether there is an arbitration clause which as per section 7 should be a document in writing signed by the parties. The bench held where the existence of the arbitration agreement is undisputed by the parties involved, the dispute should accordingly be referred to arbitration.
Case Title : Abhishek Kumar v. The State of Jharkhand
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 107
The Jharkhand High Court recently chastised a Judicial Magistrate for mechanically passing orders for an arrest warrant and a proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. After examining the records, the High Court found that the order-sheet for the non-bailable arrest warrant was written by "someone else" and the Judicial Magistrate "has just put his signature mechanically without application of mind." The court noted that the record did not show the Magistrate's satisfaction that the petitioner was evading arrest. The court observed that the order appeared to have been issued mechanically, without proper application of mind. Consequently, the arrest warrant was quashed.
Case Title: Suraj Kumar Mahato and Anr vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited through its Chairman cum Managing Director
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 108
A single judge bench of the Jharkhand High Court, comprising Justice Deepak Roshan, while deciding a Writ Petition held that the wife of a deceased employee is entitled for compensation from the date of employee's death, regardless of whether an application for compensation was submitted or not.
Other Developments
The Jharkhand High Court has taken Suo Motu cognizance of a significant error in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023 published by Universal LexisNexis. The Court identified a major discrepancy in Section 103(2), where the phrase "any other ground" was printed instead of "any other similar ground." According to the Court, this omission has serious implications for the interpretation and application of the law.
Jharkhand High Court Bids Farewell to Acting Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar
The Jharkhand High Court on Thursday bid adieu to Acting Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar, who is being transferred to the Rajasthan High Court after an 11-year tenure as a Judge. The ceremonial bench held in his honour was filled with appreciation for his warm personality and calm demeanour.
Justice Chandrashekhar was appointed as an Additional Judge of the Jharkhand High Court on January 17, 2013, and became a permanent Judge on June 27, 2014. The Central government has notified his transfer, with Justice BR Sarangi being appointed as the new Chief Justice of Jharkhand High Court.