Skip to main content
Citation Index • Supreme Court

Cases Citing Section 141

Statute: Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (negotiable-instruments-act-1881)

Archana Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 703Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

in nature, is not opposed, and hence is allowed. The Registry is directed to add the additional prayer made in paragraph 1 of the present petition to the prayer portion of the main writ petition. Patna High Court CWJC No.1412 of 2020 dt.25-06-2024 2/4 Accordingly, I.A. No.1/2020 is hereby stands d...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Sheo Charan Dalmia v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 233Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

Resident of Mohalla Dalmia House Dhami Tola, K P Road, P.S. Kotwali, Gaya District Gaya that Petitioner no. 1is Presently residing at-402, Smundra Gaurav, Worli Sea Face, Worli Colony, P.S.-Worli, Mumbai, Maharashtra 4.Sheo Arun Dalmia Son of Late Vishwanath Dalmia @ Bishwanath Laxm...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Bharat Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 676Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 222-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence under Section 33(1) / 66 of the Indian Forest (Bihar Amendment 1989) Ac...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Rajesh Tewari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 760Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

is knowingly or unknowingly, there is inaction on the part of the superiors against such erring officials despite our earlier orders in not following or adhering to the relevant rules and procedures. Patna High Court CWJC No.1022 of 2021 dt.09-12-2024 6/12 In the present case, in not recording the...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Sumit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar Bihar

undefined INSC 209Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

The prosecution case as per F.I.R is that on 26.05.2022 at about 10:00 am, the petitioner along with other F.I.R named accused persons came to the house of the informant and asked the informant’s brother-in-law(deceased) to return the loan of Rs. 30,000/- but on his incapability...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Arvind Kumar v. Bihar State Power (holding) Co. Ltd

undefined INSC 227Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

Road), P.S. Kotwali, Patna- 800021. 5.North Bihar Power Distribution Co. Ltd.-through its Managing Director, Office at Vidyut Bhawan, Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg (Bailey Road), P.S. Kotwali, Patna- 800021. 6.General Manager (HR and Adm), South Bihar Power Distribution Co. Ltd., Office at Vidyut Bhawan, ...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Baby Singh v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 849Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

deceased Dinesh Singh is not ready to give affidavit and as such till date the pension or other retiral benefits has not been distributed proportionately. 7. At this juncture, learned Advocate for the respondents submitted that since there is a dispute with regard to the claim and as such they have...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Md. Shahid v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 173Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 219-01-2024At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Adnan/- (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) ( Rajiv Roy, J) U...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Rajesh Tewari v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 542Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

case of owner is from the Nagaland whereas auction advertised through newspaper was in State of Bihar. These things have not been taken note of for these many years in umpteen number of excise cases. However, the officials are keep on committing one or the other error whether it is knowingly or unk...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
Sheo Charan Dalmia v. The State Of Bihar

undefined INSC 150Patnahcucisdb94 High Court (10 8)

67% Match

no. 38 (Old), Holding no. 96 (subsequent), presently part of Holding no. 1; (ii) further for direction to the respondents particularly respondent no. 3, 4 & 7 to abstain from creating unnecessary and unreasonable restrictions upon the petitioners in exercising their right to...

Read Full Judgment Analysis →
← Previous PagePage 5Next Page →