Jharkhand High Court
Cr.A(SJ)/1473/2005 of KADU LOHRA Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND on 10 September 2026
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 1473 of 2005 Kadu Lohra ….. Appellant Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Respondent --------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA -------- For the Appellant : Mr. Sunil Singh, Amicus Curiae. For the State : Mr.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 1473 of 2005
Kadu Lohra
….. Appellant
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
….. Respondent
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
--------
For the Appellant
: Mr. Sunil Singh, Amicus Curiae.
For the State
: Mr. Prabhu Dayal Agarwal, Spl.P.P.
---------
Order No. 11/Dated: 16th September, 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. The instant appeal has been listed under the heading “To be mentioned” on the basis of office note dated 14.09.2026.
2. It appears that on 10.09.2026, the instant appeal was dismissed, but in para-25 and 26 of the judgment, some typographical errors have been crept up.
3. It appears that in the judgment dated 10.09.2026, at para-25, it has been wrongly typed as “I take this opportunity to appreciate the assistance rendered by Mr. Sunil Singh, learned Amicus Curiae and direct the Member Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee to extend the stipulated fee as per notification of High Court Legal Services Committee to Mrs. Shail Lakra, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.”, therefore, para-25 of the said judgment be read as “I take this opportunity to appreciate the assistance rendered by Mr. Sunil Singh, learned Amicus Curiae and direct the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, Ranchi to extend the stipulated fee as per notification of High Court Legal Services Committee to Mr. Sunil Singh, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.”
4. It further appears that in para-26 of the said judgment, it has been wrongly typed as “Office is directed to ensure that a copy of this order is served upon Member Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee”, therefore, now para-26 of the said judgment be read as
“Office is directed to ensure that a copy of this order is served upon Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, Ranchi.”
5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, para-25 and 26 of the judgment dated 10.09.2026 is modified to the above extent only. Rest part of the judgment shall remain intact.
6. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, Ranchi for information and needful.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
September 16, 2026 Sunil/