Madhya Pradesh Court November 1994 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Naniya Nanuram and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1870
R.D. Shukla, J.1. The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 28th October' 86 of IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Dhar, passed in S.T. No. 177/84, whereby the accused-appellants 1 to 4 have been convicted under Section 302/34, I.P.C., for having committed murder of Babulal s/o Narottam, on 6-9-84, in village Chor Baodi and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life each. Accused Naniya and Gulab have been further convicted under Section 323/34 for having caused simple-injuries to Ramgopal and Madan and sentenced them to undergo R. I. for 3 months each. Appellant Rajababu has been acquitted of the offence under Sections 302/34 and 323/34, I.P.C., but has been convicted under Section 341, I.P.C., and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 500/- each. In default of payment of fine he shall undergo R. I. for 7 days.2. Brief history of the case is that deceased Babulal, (PW 7) Ramgopal and (PW 8) Madan, who are residents of Bachhanpur had gone to jungle (forest) for collecting tea...
Asbestos Kamgar Union Vs. Asbestos Janata Mazdoor Union and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-11-1994
Reported in: (1995)IILLJ1103MP; 1995(0)MPLJ171
ORDERS.K. Dubey, J.1. Petitioner is a registered Trade Union which has been organised as a representative union under Section 13 of the M.P. Industrial Relations Act, 1960 (for short the 'Act') for the employees in respect of the industry Eternit Everest Ltd., Kymore. The Respondent No-1 in Form E of Rule 17 and Section 17 of the Act applied before the Registrar of Representative Unions for being recognised as representative union in place of petitioner, as the Respondent No. 1 claimed its membership to be more than 51 per cent of the employees employed in the industry. The Respondent No.3 issued notice and called for the necessary information as required by Section 17 and Rule 17. The petitioner, after notice raised a preliminary objection that the application in Form-E is not signed by the General Secretary or the Secretary of the Union, hence, prayed for rejection of the application. The Respondent No. 3 rejected the objection. The petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 22 of ...
Neetu S/O Rambali Sharma Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-11-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ157
ORDERN.P. Singh, J.1. They are heard on the application for grant of regular bail to the applicant who is accused of the offences under Sections 363, 394, 372 and 392 of the Indian Penal Code and 25/27 of the Arms Act in Crime No. 92/94 P.S., Jamul, Dist. Durg.2. The applicant is alleged to have kidnapped the prosecutrix at the point of dagger and committed rape on her and torn the blouse of the mother's sister of the prosecutrix, when she intervened.3. Shri R. N. Tiwari, counsel for the applicant has contended that the charge-sheet was filed in this case on 90th day, when the applicant was not produced before the Court from the jail custody. The copy of the charge-sheet was not served to the applicant even in jail, on that date or on any subsequent date. The applicant, therefore, deserves to be enlarged on bail, under Section 167(2)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.4. Contention of Shri Tiwari is not well founded.5. The mandate of Section 167(2)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedur...
Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-11-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ768
P.N.S. Chouhan, J.1. Appellant Ramesh Kumar challenges his conviction under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentence of imprisonment for life recorded vide judgment dated 25-7-1986 passed in S.T.No. 25/1986 of Bhopal Sessions Division.2. The appellant was living with his wife Meera. On 22-9-1985 at about 2.00 P.M. he got annoyed because Meera had not cooked the meals and then poured kerosene oil over her and set her ablaze. Her cries attracted Gorelal, Sukhram, Ramesh and Sunderlal (PWs 3, 9 to 11 respectively) from the neighbourhood. The appellant then took Meera to Jai Prakash Hospital. Dr. (Smt.) Shobha Shrivastava (PW 13) attended on her in the emergency ward. The deceased had told the said Doctor that she was burnt by her husband after pouring kerosene oil over her. An intimation was sent to the T. T Nagar Police Station, Bhopal of the arrival of Meera in a burnt condition from the Panchsheel Nagar which was recorded in Sanha No. 2758 at 14.30 P.M. (Ex.P. 11-A). A.S.I. Shri J. ...
Atmaram Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-1994
Reported in: AIR1995MP225; 1995(0)MPLJ633
U.L. Bhat, C.J. 1. Petitioners, three in number, are non-tribals. On the date of commencement of the M.P. Land Revenue Code Amendment Act, 1980, petitioners have been in possessions agricultural land which earlier belonged to members of a tribe declared during the relevant period, to be aboriginal tribe under Section 165(6) of the M.P. Land Revenue Code (hereinafter referred to as Code for short). Sub-section (1) of Section 170-B of the Code required them to notify within two years of the commencement of the Act to the S.D.O. in such form and in such manner as may be prescribed the information as to how they had come in possession of such land. Petitioners did not notify the information to the S.D.O. who thereupon asked them about the failure to notify him and to show cause why the lands should not be reverted to the aboriginal vendors. The petitioners submitted statements stating that the lands have been purchased under valid registered sale deeds for adequate consideration and after ...
Cooltech Industries and ors. Vs. Dena Bank and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-09-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ629
ORDERD.P.S. Chouhan, J.1. The revision application is directed against the order dated 27-9-1993 passed by the 1st Additional District Judge, Raipur on the application of the applicants moved under Order 41, Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. Brief facts are that: The opposite party Dena Bank filed a suit for a claim against the applicants under Order 37, Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code. The procedure is given is Rule 3. According to the procedure, summons were served on the defendants in the suit. Except defendant No. 3 none appeared. The decree was passed. When the decree was put to execution, the applicants moved an application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code for setting aside the decree, which was an ex parte decree so far as they were concerned. The application for setting aside the decree is pending for consideration. When decree was set in motion by means of execution, the applicants moved th...
Champatlal Baijnath Patel Vs. Vrindawan Mishra and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-08-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ627
ORDERI.P. Rao, J.1. The allegation of the applicant, who filed a private complaint before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Sarangarh is that the first non-applicant, who is a Fisheries Extension Officer and who was appointed by the Collector as the Asstt. Returning Officer for conducting elections of the Sarpanch of Village Mohadhola, has abetted the filing of forged nomination paper, and in spite of filing of affidavits by the applicant and his proposer, has failed to inquire into the matter.2. When the case was to be taken cognizance of by the trial Court, the first non-applicant filed an application stating that the Court cannot take cognizance of the offence without sanction, as required under Section 197, Criminal Procedure Code as Fisheries Extension Officer is removable from his office only by the State Government. The trial Court rejected his objection by its order dated 26-11-1990. On revision, the learned Sessions Judge allowed the objection by his order dated 10-4-199...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Prasad Joravarsingh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-08-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ816
ORDERI.P. Rao, J.1. This revision is filed by the State against the order of the learned Special Judge, Sehore dated 29-1-1991 refusing to take cognizance of an offence under Section 3, clause of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the ground that he is not competent to take cognizance of the offence unless the case is committed by the Magistrate. The reason given by the learned Judge is that the Sessions Court while exercising powers under the Act does not forego its powers as a Sessions Court and hence committal of the case is necessary in order to enable the Court to decide the case.2. Section 14 of the Act lays down that for the purpose of providing for speedy trial, the State Government shall, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High Court, specify for each district a Court of Session to be a special Court to try the offences under this Act. Unless the special enactment provides tha...
Laxman Ramkishan and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-08-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ916
P.N.S. Chouhan, J.1. The appellants challenge their conviction under Sections 147 and 302 read with Section 149, Indian Penal Code and sentences of six months' R.I. on the first charge and imprisonment for life on the charge of murder awarded vide judgment dated 10-9-1987 passed in S.T No. 134/86 of Balaghat Sessions Division.2. The appellants as also deceased Bhaddu were residing in Village Dokerbandi about 10 Kms. from Police Station, Lalbarra. Appellant Laxman had purchased a she-buffalo from the deceased. Part of the money was not paid at the time of the sale. Mehtar (PW-1), son of deceased Bhaddu, had requested Laxman to pay the balance amount. This appears to have annoyed Laxman. On 11-8-1986 the appellants assaulted Bhaddu in his own house. The matter was reported to the police. This incident further aggravated their enmity. The deceased was threatened and was warned that he will not be able to celebrate Pola. On the date of incident, i.e., 24-8-1986, Bhaddu took out his she-buf...
Swaroop Vegetables Product Industries Ltd. Vs. Vindhya Soya Ltd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-08-1994
Reported in: 1995(0)MPLJ1024
ORDERI. Panduranga Rao, J.1. This is a revision filed by the accused against whom a private complaint was filed under Section 420, Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), challenging taking cognizance of the offence by the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hoshangabad by his order dated 9-10-1991 in Cr. Case No. 141/1991.2. The learned counsel for the applicant vehemently argued that the order of the learned Magistrate does not disclose the date of the cheque, the amount for which the cheque was issued, the date on which the cause of action has arisen and hence such a cryptic order is liable to be set aside.3. The learned counsel for the non-applicant complainant, on the other hand, submitted that the applicant had issued a cheque for Rs. 3,08,275.00 on 14th February, 1991; that when the cheque was presented to the Central Bank of India, Hoshangabad Branch, it was returned on 30-3-1991 with the endorsement 'ref...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »