Latest Jharkhand Hc updates from LegalRepublic.in.
The Jharkhand High Court dismissed a writ petition against an eviction order, finding the petitioner's 1941 Kurfanama collusive and possession of disputed land for 12 years not established under the Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act, 1949.
The Jharkhand High Court set aside a seven-year rigorous imprisonment sentence after the FSL report showed the seized substance was bhang, which falls outside the NDPS Act's definition of cannabis.
Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava dismisses a revision against a trial court order adding Sections 328 and 302/34 IPC to a Section 306 case, citing the court's independent satisfaction.
Justice Ananda Sen holds the State Disability Commissioner exceeded jurisdiction by adjudicating a land title dispute between two families in Chatra district, unrelated to any disability.
The Jharkhand High Court refused to order a DNA test of a child born in 2002, holding that the husband's divorce plaint contained no plea of non-access to rebut the Section 112 presumption.
A Division Bench led by Chief Justice M. S. Sonak reversed a Single Judge's order and set aside the termination of a contractual peon who served for 17 years, calling the penalty grossly disproportionate.
The Jharkhand High Court held that submission of a chargesheet and issuance of summons do not bar anticipatory bail, distinguishing a Supreme Court ruling confined to private complaint cases.
The High Court of Jharkhand condoned a 1,374-day delay, enhanced victim compensation fivefold, and directed the State to clear pending medical bills for a male acid attack survivor.
The Jharkhand High Court's Division Bench admitted a PIL questioning whether a 2018 JPSC resolution on disability certificate formats conflicts with the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
The Jharkhand High Court refused to admit a second appeal challenging an ex-parte decree, finding proper notice was served and the appellants' sale deed referenced a different plot entirely.
A Division Bench of the Jharkhand High Court disposed of a PIL with nineteen binding directions covering Zero FIR compliance, One-Stop Centre reform, victim compensation timelines, and a ban on the two-finger test.
