Jharkhand High Court Weekly Roundup: June 30 - July 7, 2024

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) 107Suraj Kumar Mahato and Anr vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited through its Chairman cum Managing Director 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 108Judgements/Orders This WeekPerson Seeking Transfer Of License On Compassionate Grounds Must Be "Dependent" Of Deceased: Jharkhand High CourtCase Title: Brajkishore Sao V. The State of Jharkhand LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 104The 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.”Jharkhand HC Orders ₹5 Lakh Compensation For Man Who Was Wrongly Taken Into Police Custody & Tortured, Directs Recovery From Accused OfficerCase Title: Anil Kumar Singh vs State of Jharkhand and Ors LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 105The 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.Section 11 Of Arbitration Act Mandates Examination Of Written, Signed Arbitration Clauses As Per Section 7 Requirements: Jharkhand High CourtCase Title: Tata Steel Utilities and Infrastructure Services Limited vs Jharkhand Urban Infrastructure Development Company LimitedLL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 106The 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. 'Order Sheet Written By Someone Else, Judicial Magistrate Just Put Signature' : Jharkhand High Court Quashes Warrant Issued RecklesslyCase Title : Abhishek Kumar v. The State of JharkhandLL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 107The 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.Deceased Employee's Wife Entitled For Compensation From Date Of Death, Irrespective Application: Jharkhand High CourtCase Title: Suraj Kumar Mahato and Anr vs Bharat Coking Coal Limited through its Chairman cum Managing DirectorLL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Jha) 108A 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 DevelopmentsJharkhand HC Takes Suo Moto Cognizance Of 'Error' In 'Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita' Published By 'Universal LexisNexis', Directs Urgent...

Jharkhand High Court Weekly Roundup: June 30 - July 7, 2024

Bhavya Singh

Tags