The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Arun

The State of Madhya Pradesh vs Arun

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Apr 29, 2013

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1043590

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/1043590
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Apr 29, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Respondent

Arun

Excerpt

.....katni in criminal revision no.203/2012 whereby the revision filed by the respondent has been allowed and the order dated 1.11.2012 passed by jmfc has been set aside and the vehicle of the respondent has been directed to be released on bail. the facts, in short, giving rise to this revision petition are that the on 25.20.2012 at about 9:30 am, sub-inspector (excise).slimnabad circle, received a secret information in regard to transporting of illicit liquor. in order to verify the aforesaid information, the police intercepted vehicle mp-20t/5650 on bandhi tiraha, slimnabad and on search, it was found that accused rajjan raikwar was transporting 650 quarters bearing 180 ml country made liquor each. he was arrested. liquor was seized along with vehicle mp-20t/ 5650. rajjan raikwar was prosecuted before jmfc. the applicant filed application under section 457 of the cr.p.c.for releasing the aforesaid vehicle on supurdginama before jmfc, which was dismissed. being aggrieved thereby, the applicant filed a revision before additional sessions judge, sessions division, katni to the court of firs.additional sessions judge, katni, which was allowed and the vehicle has been directed to be released on supurdginama. being aggrieved thereby, the state has preferred this revision. learned government advocate has submitted that the revisional court has committed illegality in releasing the vehicle, therefore, the impugned order be set aside. none has appeared for the respondent despite service of notice. i have perused the orders passed by the courts below along with the case diary. learned additional sessions judge has placed reliance on the decisions of this court in kailash versus state of m.p.- 1999(ii) mpwn-133, panduranga kadam versus state of m.p.- 2005 (ii) mpwn 4 and suresh versus state of m.p.- 2003 (i) mplj 639 considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, i am of the considered view that the revisional court has not committed any illegality in passing.....

Full Judgment

Cr.R.No.191/2013 29.4.2013 Shri A.K.Singh, GA for the State.

None for the respondent.

This revision petition has been filed by the State being aggrieved by order dated 16.11.2012 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Sessions Division, Katni to the Court of FiRs.Additional Sessions Judge, Katni in Criminal Revision No.203/2012 whereby the revision filed by the respondent has been allowed and the order dated 1.11.2012 passed by JMFC has been set aside and the vehicle of the respondent has been directed to be released on bail.

The facts, in short, giving rise to this revision petition are that the on 25.20.2012 at about 9:30 AM, Sub-Inspector (Excise).Slimnabad Circle, received a secret information in regard to transporting of illicit liquor.

In order to verify the aforesaid information, the Police intercepted Vehicle MP-20T/5650 on Bandhi tiraha, Slimnabad and on search, it was found that accused Rajjan Raikwar was transporting 650 quarters bearing 180 ml country made liquor each.

He was arrested.

Liquor was seized along with Vehicle MP-20T/ 5650.

Rajjan Raikwar was prosecuted before JMFC.

The applicant filed application under Section 457 of the Cr.P.C.for releasing the aforesaid vehicle on supurdginama before JMFC, which was dismissed.

Being aggrieved thereby, the applicant filed a revision before Additional Sessions Judge, Sessions Division, Katni to the Court of FiRs.Additional Sessions Judge, Katni, which was allowed and the vehicle has been directed to be released on supurdginama.

Being aggrieved thereby, the State has preferred this revision.

Learned Government Advocate has submitted that the revisional Court has committed illegality in releasing the vehicle, therefore, the impugned order be set aside.

None has appeared for the respondent despite service of notice.

I have perused the orders passed by the Courts below along with the case diary.

Learned Additional Sessions Judge has placed reliance on the decisions of this Court in Kailash versus State of M.P.- 1999(II) MPWN-133, Panduranga Kadam versus State of M.P.- 2005 (II) MPWN 4 and Suresh versus State of M.P.- 2003 (I) MPLJ 639

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that the revisional Court has not committed any illegality in passing the order dated 16.11.2012.

Thus, I do not find any ground to make interference in the impugned order.

The revision being devoid of merits, is hereby dismissed.

(G.S.Solanki) Judge PB

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