Jharkhand High Court Weekly Roundup: July 22 - July 28, 2024

Nominal Index [Citations: 2023 LiveLaw (Jha) 117-124]TATA Capital Housing Finance Limited V. The State of Jharkhand 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 117Arun Kumar Thakur V. The State of Jharkhand & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 118Rengha Oraon @ Regha Oraon V. State of Jharkhand 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 119Chhotu Kalindi V. The State of Jharkhand 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 120Ajit Barla V. State of Jharkhand 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 121Saryu Roy V. The State of Jharkhand 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 122Roshan Hazam @ Roshan Baraik V. The State of Jharkhand 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 123 PCIT Versus Tripta Sharma 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 124Judgements/Orders This WeekSARFAESI ACT | District Magistrate Not Adjudicating Authority, Must Assist Secured Creditors In Asset Possession: Jharkhand High CourtCase Title: TATA Capital Housing Finance Limited V. The State of Jharkhand LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 117The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that it is the duty of the District Magistrate to assist secured creditors in taking possession of secured assets under the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The court clarified that the District Magistrate is not the adjudicating authority under this Act.Justice Ananda Sen observed, “It is the duty of the District Magistrate to assist the secured creditor in taking possession of the secured assets. The timeframe has been mentioned which is 30 days. Any delay at the instance of the District Magistrate will frustrate the provision of this Act. Further, the District Magistrate is not the Adjudicating Authority under the aforesaid Act. His duty is only to assist the secured creditor in taking possession of the property i.e. giving assistance so that the possession can be taken peacefully and if someone obstructs, appropriate action can be taken against him.”Discretionary Power To Summon Witnesses U/S 311 Cr.P.C. Must Be Exercised Judiciously, With Strong Reasons And Caution: Jharkhand High CourtCase Title: Arun Kumar Thakur V. The State of Jharkhand & Anr.LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 118The Jharkhand High Court has affirmed the discretionary power of courts under Section 311 Cr.P.C., emphasising its role in uncovering the truth while underscoring the need for its judicious exercise.Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi noted, “Section 311 Cr.P.C. is one of many such provisions which strengthens the arms of the Court in its efforts to unearth the truth by procedural sanction by law. At the same time, the discretionary power vested under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has to be exercised judiciously for strong and valid reason and with caution and circumspection to meet the ends of justice.”'Subsistence Of Valid Marriage Is Prerequisite For Passing Maintenance Orders U/S 125 Cr.P.C': Jharkhand High CourtCase Title: Rengha Oraon @ Regha Oraon V. State of JharkhandLL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 119The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that a valid marriage is a prerequisite for issuing orders under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). The court set aside a maintenance order issued under Section 125, emphasising that the petitioner's second marriage lacked legal sanctity unless he was validly divorced from his first wife.Justice Gautam Kumar Choudhary, who presided over the case, stated, “Subsistence of a valid marriage is prerequisite for passing any order under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. Applicant (AW-3) has herself admitted that Petitioner was having wife and children. It has been deposed by her in para 3 that his first wife was living separately with husband and she is the second wife.”To Attract Applicability Of Section 324 IPC, Voluntary Hurt Must Be Caused By 'Dangerous' Instrument Which Can Cause Death: Jharkhand High CourtCase Title: Chhotu Kalindi V. The State of JharkhandLL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 120The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that to attract Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), voluntary hurt must be caused by instruments of shooting, stabbing, or cutting. The court noted that the use of such instruments can definitely cause death.Justices Ananda Sen and Subhash Chand observed, “Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code provides for punishment for voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means. ... To attract Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, a voluntary hurt should be caused by an instrument of shooting and stabbing or cutting. Definitely use of the said instrument can cause death.”When Eyewitness Testimony Is Credible, Proving Motive Behind Offense Is Not Necessary: Jharkhand High CourtCase title: Ajit Barla V. State of JharkhandLL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 121The Jharkhand High Court has held that when there is an eyewitness who has seen the commission of murder and their evidence is credible, it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove the motive behind the offence.“When there is eye witness, who had seen the commission of murder and their evidence is credible, it is not necessary that the prosecution has to prove the motive ...

Jharkhand High Court Weekly Roundup: July 22 - July 28, 2024

Bhavya Singh

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Jharkhand High Court Weekly Roundup: July 22 - July 28, 2024

Bhavya Singh

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers