Madhya Pradesh Court August 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.
State of M.P. Vs. Kesharimal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-1994
Reported in: I(1995)DMC89
A.G. Qureshi, J.1. This is an appeal by the State against the judgment passed by the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Dhar, in S.T. No. 181 of 1986 whereby the respondents have been acquitted of committing an offence under Section 498A and Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC.2. The facts leading to this appeal, in short, are that the respondents were charged for committing offences under Sections 302 read with Section 34 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that on 21-3-1986 at Badnawar, they caused the death of Madhubala wife of Ashok Kumar in furtherance of the common intention to cause her death and before her death they treated her cruelly with the intention of getting dowry. The accused objured the guilt and pleaded not guilty. After the trial the learned lower Court acquitted the respondents. Hence this appeal by the State.3. The story of the prosecution is that the deceased Madhubala was wedded to Ashok Kumar. The respondents used to treat her cruelly because of ...
Narendrasingh Bahalsingh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-1994
Reported in: 1996(0)MPLJ518
D.P.S. Chouhan, J.1. The present is a case of classic features wherein appellant Narendra Singh on having been convicted under Section 376, Indian Penal Code for committing rape on a minor girl, namely, Kuleshari in S. T. No. 80/85 vide judgment and order dated 31-3-1986 passed by the Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon, wherefor he was sentenced to 3 years' R. I., has approached to this Court in appellate forum praying for setting aside of the conviction as well as sentence.2. The appellant and the prosecutrix Kuleshari both are residents of the same village Amgaon, P. S.Dongargaon and there is no ascertained place of occurrence as the incident is not a solitary one and as such the time of incident also cannot be described as the alleged offence was of recurring nature. According to the version of the prosecution, it appears, that the prosecutrix was employed by the accused or the family of the accused for the house-hold work as well as for agriculture work in the agriculture fields for about...
Narendrasingh, Son of Bahalsingh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-03-1994
Reported in: 1996CriLJ198
D.P.S. Chouhan, J.1. The present is a case of classic features wherein appellant Narendra Singh on having been convicted under Section 376, I.P.C. for committing rape on a minor girl, namely, Kuleshari in S.T. No. 80/85 vide judgment and order dated 31-3-1986 passed by the Sessions Judge, Rajnandgaon, wherefor he was sentenced to 3 years R.I., has approached to this Court in appellate forum prayer for setting aside of the conviction as well as sentence.2. The appellant and the prosecutrix Kuleshari both are residents of the same village Amgaon, P.S. Dongargaon and there is no ascertained place of occurrence as the incident is not a solitary one and as such the time of incident also cannot be described as the alleged offence was of recurring nature. According to the version of the prosecution, it appears that the prosecutrix was employed by the accused or the family of the accused for the house-hold work as well as for agriculture work in the agriculture fields for about a year before t...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Presiding Officer, Central Govt. Industrial T ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-02-1994
Reported in: [1995(71)FLR20]; (1995)ILLJ994MP; 1994(0)MPLJ970
ORDERD.M. Dharmadhikari, J.1. A common order is being passed in this petition and the connected petition being M.P.No. 1711/91 as the two cases involve a common question of law.2. The two workmen-deceased Ramsumiran and Chandrabhar who are respondents in the two petitions, were the employees in the Central Ordnance Depot of the Union of India. The workmen were the employees under the Union of India in its Defence establishment. Their services were terminated by the two separate orders by giving the one month's notice or pay in lieu thereof in accordance with the provisions contained in Rule 5(1) of the Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1955 (shortly referred to as 'the Rules of 1966'). The workmen approached the Central Govt. Industrial Tribu-nal-Cum-Labour Court, Jabalpur by way of reference for adjudication of the dispute about their termination of services under Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour court by the two awards impu...
Mandu Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Madhya Pradesh Pradushan Niw ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-01-1994
Reported in: AIR1995MP57
ORDER1. This order also governs the disposal of M. P. No. 2037/93 (Kedia Leather v. The M. P. Pradushan Niyantran Board). M.P. No. 692/92(Kedia Leather v. The M. P. Pradushan Niyantran Board), M. P. No. 2129/93 ( Kedia Distilleries Ltd. v. M. P. Pradushan Niyantran Board). M. P. No. 2040/93 (Vindhyachal Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. v. M. P. Pradushan Niwaran Mandal).2. In each of these petitions, presented under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, order passed by the respondent (M. P. Pollution Control Board), directing stoppage of production, is under challenge.3. The petition wise facts in brief are as under:--(a) M. P. No. 2038/93. The petitioner No. I is a company and owns a factory located at village Sojwaya, District Dhar. It manufactures and distributes Indian made Foreign Liquor (IMFL). It procured registration as Small Scale Industries on 27-11-84. It constructed lagooning system of effluent treatment plant along with the distillery. The Respondent issued show cause notice...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›