Ashok Kumar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Ashok Kumar vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided May 01, 2013

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1042427

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1042427
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: May 01, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ashok Kumar

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

criminal revision no.1876/2011 1.5.2013 shri s.k.dixit, advocate for the applicants. shri punit shroti, pl for the state. heard on i.a.no.20451/2012, an application under section 320(2) of the cr.p.c.seeking permission to compromise the matter with applicant no.4 sarju prasad. complainant/injured rajesh kumar gupta is present in person. he has filed an affidavit in support of application. it is submitted that complainant and applicant no.4 sarju prasad are the residents of same village, they want to live peacefully, therefore, they have compromised the matter. in view of the above, the complainant is permitted to compromise the matter with applicant no.4 sarju prasad. heard on i.a.no.20452/2012, which is a compromise petition. the application is allowed. compromise is verified and accepted. applicant no.4 sarju prasad is acquitted to the charge under section 325/34 of the ipc. the fine amount, if any, has been deposited by applicant no.4 sarju prasad, be refunded to him. this petition shall be continued with respect to applicant nos.1 to 3. petition is admitted for final hearing. list for final hearing in due course. (g.s.solanki) judge pb

Full Judgment

Criminal Revision No.1876/2011 1.5.2013 Shri S.K.Dixit, Advocate for the applicants.

Shri Punit Shroti, PL for the State.

Heard on I.A.No.20451/2012, an application under Section 320(2) of the Cr.P.C.seeking permission to compromise the matter with applicant No.4 Sarju Prasad.

Complainant/injured Rajesh Kumar Gupta is present in person.

He has filed an affidavit in support of application.

It is submitted that complainant and applicant No.4 Sarju Prasad are the residents of same village, they want to live peacefully, therefore, they have compromised the matter.

In view of the above, the complainant is permitted to compromise the matter with applicant No.4 Sarju Prasad.

Heard on I.A.No.20452/2012, which is a compromise petition.

The application is allowed.

Compromise is verified and accepted.

Applicant No.4 Sarju Prasad is acquitted to the charge under Section 325/34 of the IPC.

The fine amount, if any, has been deposited by applicant No.4 Sarju Prasad, be refunded to him.

This petition shall be continued with respect to applicant Nos.1 to 3.

Petition is admitted for final hearing.

List for final hearing in due course.

(G.S.Solanki) Judge PB

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2013 Same Parties Ashok Kumar vs The State of Madhya Pradesh Same Subject Education