Madhya Pradesh Court May 1958 Judgments
The State Vs. Karansingh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-14-1958
Reported in: AIR1960MP31
Khan, J.1. The Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior, convicted Karan Singh son of Raghuvir Singh Rajput under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to death. The record of the case has been sent to the High Court under Section 374 of the Cr. P. C. for confirmation of the death sentence and the case is numbered as Criminal Reference No. 1 of 1958. The accused has also filed appeal No. 13 of 1958 against his conviction and sentence. Both the cases are being disposed of by a single judgment.2. The prosecution story is that on 29-3-1953 nearabout sun-down some persons dressed in Khaki uniforms and armed with rifles and guns went to Police Station Kolaras. They entered the inner courtyard of the Police Station by a back door. They, were mistaken to be a police-party by the Police men that were at the Thana, but when they approached nearer and opened fire, it was then realised that they were dacoits masquerading in Police uniform. Gopilal Sentry, who had a 303 rifle with him, fearing...
Tag this Judgment!Ramlal Singh and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-14-1958
Reported in: AIR1958MP380; 1958CriLJ1402
H.R. Krishnan, J.1. This judgment covers three proceedings, namely death reference No. 3 of 1957 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Shajapur, Appeal No. 69 of 1957 by the condemned man Ramlal Singh, and Appeal No. 83 of 1957 by five others who were sentenced under different sections to be presently set out. The Additional Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced the six accused thus; Ramlal s/o Devi Singh under Section 302 read with section 149 I. P. C., for the murder of Fateh Singh and Jagannath Singh and sentenced him to be hanged by the neck until he is dead; the remaining five persons, Karan Singh son of Devi Singh, Ghisa Singh son of Devi Singh. Amar Singh, Hari Singh sons of Karan Singh, and Pooriyawas son of Prithvi Singh, who is a servant, halwaha of the family, have all been convicted under Section 302 read with section 149 I. P. C., and sentenced to life imprisonment.His reason for awarding the lesser sentence is the youth of Hari Singh and Amar Singh; and the fac...
Tag this Judgment!The State Vs. Karan Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-14-1958
Reported in: 1960CriLJ230
A.H. Khan, J.1. The Additional Sessions Judge, Gwalior, convicted Karan Singh son of Raghuvir Singh Rajput Under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to death. The record of the case has been sent to the High Court Under Section 374 of the Cr. P.C. for confirmation of the death sentence and the case is numbered as Criminal Reference No. 1 of 1958. The accused has also filed appeal No. 13 of 1958 against his conviction and sentence. Both the cases are being disposed of by a single judgment.2. The prosecution story is that on 29-3-1953 nearabout sun-down some persons dressed in Khaki uniforms and armed with rifles and guns went to Police Station Kolaras, They entered the iAier courtyard of the Police Station by a back door. They were mistaken to be a police-party by the Police men that were at the Thana, but when they approached nearer and opened fire, it was then realised that they were dacoits masquerading in Police uniform. Gopilal Sentry, who had a 303 rifle with him, fear...
Tag this Judgment!The State Vs. Mansinghrao
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-10-1958
Reported in: AIR1958MP413; 1958CriLJ1485; (1958)IILLJ585MP
A.H. Khan, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff against the State of Madhya Bharat in which he had sought a declaration that his dismissal by the Revenue Minister is invalid and that he still continues to be in service. The suit was decreed by the Civil Judge, First Class, Bhind and on appeal the decision was affirmed by the District Judge.2. The facts of the case lie within a short compass: The plaintiff was a Naib Tehsildar in year 1940 and was in the service of the Gwalior State. Near about that time, a complaint was filed against him by one Kishanlal. While the enquiry was proceeding, the then Maharaja of Gwalior went on a tour of the Mandsaur District and the matter was placed before him. The then Maharaja of Gwalior reprimanded the plaintiff and issued him a warning by way of punishment.Thereafter he continued to be in service and on two subsequent occasions was promoted to higher grades also. On the formation of Madhya Bharat State, sometime in y...
Tag this Judgment!Umashanker Muljibhai Trivedi Vs. Manaklal and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-08-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP144
M. Hidayatullah, C.J.1. This appeal has been tiled by U. M. Trivedi under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and is directed against the order of the Election Tribunal, Ratlam, dismissing his election petition in limine on the ground that it was not accompanied by a valid receipt of deposit as required by Section 117 of the Act.2. The appellant and the four respondents were contesting candidates for election to the House of the People from the Mandsaur Parliamentary Constituency. As a result of the Poll, respondent No. 1 was declared elected. In his election petition, the appellant alleged commission of various corrupt practices by respondent No. 1, or his agents, or by other persons with his consent. He accordingly prayed for a declaration that the election of respondent No. 1 was void and that he himself (appellant) was elected.3. The election petition was contested by respondent No. 1 and proceeded ex parte against the oth...
Tag this Judgment!Chakrapani Jagannath Prasad Vs. Chandoo Sahadeo and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-06-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP397
M. Hidayatullah, C.J.1. This appeal has been filed by Chakrapani Shukla, who was the returned candidate from the Bhatapara constituency No. 164 for the Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly in the recent elections. It is directed against two of his competitors. Chandoo son of Sahadeo and Surya Prasad Mishra, The election petition was moved by the respondents who had also joined two of the other contesting candidates Bishoha and Churahi, but who were discharged by the Election Tribunal. Bishoha and Churahi are no longer parties to this proceeding, and indeed the matter is not one in which it was necessary to join them under Section 82 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951.2. At the election five persons had filed theirnomination papers, but four of them alone contestedthe election. The first respondent Chandoo wasdeclared to have retired from the contest, and it ishis retirement which was the subject-matter of enquiry in the election petition. The votes secured bythe respective ca...
Tag this Judgment!Mohansingh Laxmansinghji Vs. Bhanwarlal Natha and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-06-1958
Reported in: AIR1959MP145
G.P. Bhutt, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), by an unsuccessful candidate who filed an election petition challenging the election of respondent No. 1 to the State Legislative Assembly from the Sitamau Assembly Constituency in the last general election held on 1-3-1957.2. The appellant and the four respondents were the contesting candidates at the election. Some of the candidates whose nomination papers were accepted withdrew their nomination on the appointed day, namely, 4-2-1957, and accordingly no ballot boxes were kept for them in the polling stations. One of them was Ram Ratan, who, according to the appellant, submitted his notice of withdrawal to the Returning Officer after 3 P. M.The case of the appellant was that acceptance of his notice of withdrawal after 3 P. M. was against the provisions of the Act and materially affected the result of the election. He also alleged commission of cert...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›