20 hours, 23 minutes ago

Jharkhand High Court Annual Digest 2024- Part I

Live Law

Nominal Index Rahul Yadav @ Hari Kumar Yadav, vs. Justice Subhash Chand observed, "From the bare perusal of Rule 11 of the Jharkhand Minerals Rules, 2017, it is evident that though the court of Deputy Commissioner of the district concerned is empowered to conduct the confiscation proceeding in regard to the minerals, tool, equipment, vehicle or anything seized shall dispose of the same; yet this jurisdiction of the court of Deputy Commissioner of the district concerned is not exclusive jurisdiction.” Jharkhand HC Declines Aventis Pharma's Plea To Quash Criminal Proceedings Over Ofloxacin Tablet Samples Allegedly Not Upto Standard Quality Requirements Case Title: M/s Aventis Pharma Limited vs The State of Jharkhand LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 36 The Jharkhand High Court has rejected the plea of Aventis Pharma, a global healthcare company, seeking to dismiss the entire criminal proceedings related to a complaint filed under section 27 of the Drug and Cosmetics Act, 1940. So far as the enquiry report is concerned, the same can be a piece of evidence in favour of the petitioner in the suit filed under Section 26 of the Specific Relief Act.” S. 106 Evidence Act | Unless Prosecution Proves Case Beyond Reasonable Doubt, Burden Of Proof Can't Be Shifted To Accused: Jharkhand High Court Case Title: Bablu Tirkey vs The State of Jharkhand LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 76 In a recent ruling, the Jharkhand High Court overturned the judgement of a trial court in a murder case, emphasizing the necessity for the prosecution to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. The division bench comprising Justices Subhash Chand and Ananda Sen, observed, “The conjoined reading of Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 also shows that there must be material to show that soon before death, the victim was subjected to cruelty or harassment based on demand of dowry.” Deputy Commissioner-Cum-District Magistrate Not Competent Authority To Order Confiscation Of Commercial Vehicle: Jharkhand High Court Case Title: Shahid Ansari Vs. State of Jharkhand LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 78 The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that the Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate is not a competent authority to order the confiscation of a commercial vehicle. The division bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Navneet Kumar emphasized, “In our opinion, the proper officer under the GST should not be requiring or forcing or coercing a person so summoned to give statement after the office hours.” Section 11 Petition Requires Only Existence of Arbitration Clause, 'No More, No Less': Jharkhand High Court Case Title: M/s Smart Chip Private Limited vs Jharkhand State Cooperative Bank Limited LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 100 The Jharkhand High Court bench of Acting Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar has held that the court in Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is not required to look beyond except existence of the arbitration clause at this stage; 'no more no less'.