IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Lakhan Lal Sahu Son of Late Harakh Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accused's non-involvement in initial agreement. (Para 2 , 10) |
| 2. breach of contract requires intent to cheat from inception. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. payment of advance is not entrustment under ipc. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. cognizance cannot exceed charge-sheet scope. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. criminal proceedings quashed due to abuse of process. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
JUDGMENT :
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.
I.A. No.12214 of 2025
Heard the parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this interlocutory application has been filed with a prayer to delete the name of the petitioner No.1 of this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition namely Lakhan Lal Sahu who died on 10.08.2022 during the pendency of this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition.
Considering the facts of the case, the prayer of the petitioners is allowed.
Registry is directed to delete the name of the petitioner No.1 of this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition namely Lakhan Lal Sahu from the cause-title of this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition and re-number the remaining petitioners as petitioner Nos.1 and 2 with red ink.
Accordingly, this interlocutory application stands allowed.
Cr.M.P. No.2995 of 2021
This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has bee
Vijay Kumar Ghai & Others vs. State of West Bengal & Others
Uma Shankar Gopalika vs. State of Bihar & Another
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.