SUKHDEO KUMHAR vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND STATE OF JHARKHAND — Crl.A. No. 640/2010
Case under Section II-A. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010186862009
Filing Date
03-Jul-2009
Registration No
Crl.A. No. 640/2010
Diary Number
18686/2009
Order Date
14-Feb-2019
Document Type
ROP - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Disposed Off
Last updated 05-Jul-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SUKHDEO KUMHAR
Adv. FARRUKH RASHEED
Respondent(s)
-
1.THE STATE OF JHARKHAND STATE OF JHARKHAND
Adv. GOPAL PRASAD
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Feb-2019
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
14-Feb-2019
After Week/Month/Vacation
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Navin Sinha and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Indu Malhotra
-
14-Feb-2019
After Week/Month/Vacation
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Navin Sinha
-
13-Feb-2019
After Week/Month/Vacation
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Navin Sinha and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Indira Banerjee
-
12-Feb-2019
After Week/Month/Vacation
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Navin Sinha
-
31-Jan-2019
After Week/Month/Vacation
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vineet Saran
-
30-Jan-2019
After Week/Month/Vacation
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vineet Saran
-
17-Jan-2019
After Week/Month/Vacation
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vineet Saran
-
16-Jan-2019
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
17-Jan-2013
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
12-Dec-2012
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
26-Mar-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
26-Feb-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
25-Jan-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
11-Dec-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
16-Nov-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
12-Aug-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
03-Jul-2009
Case filed
Registration No. Crl.A. No. 640/2010
Summary of Crl.A. No. 640/2010 — Sukhdeo Kumhar v. State of Jharkhand The Supreme Court dismissed the appellants' criminal appeal on February 14, 2019, upholding their conviction under Section 307/149 IPC for a 1988 incident arising from a land dispute. The court rejected both grounds of appeal: the private defence claim lacked material evidence, and discrepancies in witness testimony regarding the place of occurrence were unpersuasive as locations were contiguous. The court reduced the sentence from six to three years imprisonment, directing appellants to surrender within six weeks. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts