Phoolchand Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh

Phoolchand vs The State of Madhya Pradesh

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Feb 27, 2013

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1051981

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/1051981
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Decided On: Feb 27, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Phoolchand

Respondent

The State of Madhya Pradesh

Excerpt

1 m.cr.c no.14433/2012 m.cr.c.no.14433/2012 27.02.2013 shri s.d.gupta, advocate for the petitioner. respondent/state by smt. pratibha mishra, panel lawyer. shri purshottam patel, advocate for respondent no.2. present petition has been preferred for passing appropriate order for consideration of compromise petition filed by the parties under section 320(2) cr.p.c vide judgement dated 17/08/2012, the petitioner was convicted by jmfc, katni in criminal appeal no.2478/2007 under section 354 ipc and sentenced to 6 months r.i.in the court of sessions judge, katni, appeal is pending against the aforesaid judgment. in appellate court, parties submitted a compromise petition along with application under section 320(2) cr.p.c.vide order dated 11/10/2012, the sessions judge, katni in criminal appeal no.184/2012 dismissed the application on the ground that offence is not compoundable even with the permission of court also. this petition is disposed of with direction to the sessions judge, katni that if after hearing the appeal on merits if petitioner is found convicted under 2 m.cr.c no.14433/2012 section 354 ipc, then the fact of compromise shall be taken into consideration for awarding suitable/lenient sentence in the matter. petition is disposed of as indicated above. (tarun kumar kaushal) judge tarun

Full Judgment

1 M.Cr.C No.14433/2012 M.Cr.C.No.14433/2012 27.02.2013 Shri S.D.Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Respondent/State by Smt.

Pratibha Mishra, Panel Lawyer.

Shri Purshottam Patel, Advocate for respondent no.2.

Present petition has been preferred for passing appropriate order for consideration of compromise petition filed by the parties under section 320(2) Cr.P.C Vide judgement dated 17/08/2012, the petitioner was convicted by JMFC, Katni in Criminal Appeal No.2478/2007 under section 354 IPC and sentenced to 6 months R.I.In the court of Sessions Judge, Katni, appeal is pending against the aforesaid judgment.

In appellate court, parties submitted a compromise petition along with application under section 320(2) Cr.P.C.Vide order dated 11/10/2012, the Sessions Judge, Katni in Criminal Appeal No.184/2012 dismissed the application on the ground that offence is not compoundable even with the permission of court also.

This petition is disposed of with direction to the Sessions Judge, Katni that if after hearing the appeal on merits if petitioner is found convicted under 2 M.Cr.C No.14433/2012 section 354 IPC, then the fact of compromise shall be taken into consideration for awarding suitable/lenient sentence in the matter.

Petition is disposed of as indicated above.

(Tarun Kumar Kaushal) Judge tarun

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