Madhya Pradesh Court March 2002 Judgments
State of M.P. Vs. Balwantsingh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-28-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ2589; 2002(3)MPHT289; 2002(4)MPLJ218
S.L. Kochar, J.1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and finding dated 24-10-94 passed by the Second Addl. Sessions Judge, Khargone in Sessions Trial No. 198/90 acquitting the respondent for the murder of Jaipalsingh. The State has preferred this appeal.2. The prosecution case in nut-shell before the Trial Court was that at 9.00 P.M. oh 1-5-90, the complainant Narayansingh resident of Village Pokhar was lying on a cot and his nephew (Brother's son) Jaipalsingh was also lying on another cot. At that juncture, the respondent, who was residing in front of their house, came over there having a Kharalia (a wooden log used in bullock-cart for support of luggage) and dealt a blow which landed on the head of Jaipalsingh. In intervention by Narayansingh, he too was given a blow causing simple injury on his left palm. On cries being raised by Narayansingh, his son Kalu and many other persons had assembled there to whom the matter was disclosed by the complainant and his son. The respondent had assa...
Tag this Judgment!Digpal Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-28-2002
Reported in: (2003)ILLJ876MP; 2002(5)MPHT131; 2002(4)MPLJ274
ORDERNarin Singh Azad, J. 1. The petitioner seeks quashment of order dated March 20, 2002 passed by Recovery Officer, Employees' Provident Fund Organisation, 7, Race Course Road, Indore. Camp Bhopal, wherein the petitioner is directed to be detained in civil prison for a period of 6 months, commencing with the date of order, by invoking the provisions contained in. Section 8B of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').2. This petition is being resisted on the grounds, firstly, that the proceedings before Recovery Officer are not Criminal Proceedings and secondly, an alternate remedy in appeal is provided under the Act.3. As per scheme of the Act, the enquiry is conducted by any of the officers, authorised under Section 7A of the Act, for determining the money due from employers. It is also provided under Sub-section (4) of Section 7A of the Act that in case an ex parte order is passed on account of absence of employer...
Tag this Judgment!Kamla Bajpai and ors. Vs. Smt. Sharda Devi Bajpai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-2002
Reported in: AIR2002MP262; 2002(5)MPHT71; 2002(3)MPLJ600
K.K. Lahoti, J.1. This appeal is directed against order dated 6-4-2002 in MC.C. No. 514/2000 passed by the learned single Judge rejecting the application filed by the appellants under Order 41, Rule 19, Code of Civil procedure, 1908 and Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 for readmission of second appeal dismissed in default of appearance. 2. Short facts of the case are that the appellants filed Second Appeal No. 417/ 1996, under Section 100. Code of Civil Procedure in this Court. It was listed for hearing on 28-7-1997 but was dismissed for want of prosecution as appellants and their counsel failed to appear on that date. Thereafter, on May 30, 2000, appellants filed an application under Order 41, Rule 19, C.P.C. for readmission of the appeal dismissed In default on 28-7-1997. Though specific provision has not been mentioned in the application, but it is Order 41. Rule 19, Code of Civil Procedure which is precisely invoked for readmission of appeal dismissed In default of appearance. Alo...
Tag this Judgment!Director, Indian Veterinary Institute and ors. Vs. Dr. S.C. Dubey and ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-2002
Reported in: 2002(5)MPHT66
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1. As a singular question of law is involved in these writ petitions they were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common order. For the sake of clarity and convenience, the facts in W.P. No. 2300/2000 are adumbrated herein.2. The Indian Council of Research is an autonomous body which comes under the Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, Department of Agricultural Research and Education. The aforesaid body is one of the institutes working under the Indian Council of Agricultural Research. The respondent No. 1, Dr. S.C. Dubey and five others were approved by the competent authority for deputation for availing training in the United States of America. The order passed in that regard has been brought on record as Annexure P-2. The Government of India vide letter dated 19-8-1999 in the Ministry of External Affairs fixed the rate of daily allowance for various categories of officers proceeding on duty to the foreign countries. The said circular has been...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Babita @ Sushama Vs. Santosh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-2002
Reported in: II(2002)DMC38
S.B. Sakrikar, J.1. Appellant (wife) has directed this appeal against the judgment and the decree dated 3rd May, 2001 passed by ADJ, Shujalpur, District Shajapur in Civil Case No. 20/1999, thereby dismissing the application filed on behalf of the appellant for grant of decree of divorce against the respondent under the provisions of Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act.2. On appearance of respondent, on service of notice of final hearing of this appeal effort was made for reconciliation between the parties but due to the differences existing between the parties reconciliation between the parties was not possible.3. During the pendency of this appeal, on 11.3.2002 both the appellant and the respondent jointly filed I.A. No. 873/2002 under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act for grant of decree of divorce on mutual consent as contemplated under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act. The facts stated in the application are verified by both the parties appearing before the Court and atte...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Bai and anr. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2002
Reported in: II(2002)DMC492; 2002(3)MPHT269
R.B. Dixit, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved by judgment and order of conviction dated 26-3-97 by Additional Judge to Sessions Judge, Vidisha at Basoda, passed in Sessions Trial No. 177/95, thereby convicting appellants under Section 306, IPC and sentencing them to seven years' R.I. each, appellants have come up in appeal seeking redress praying for setting aside the aforesaid sentence and conviction passed against them.2. It is not disputed that deceased Krishna Bai was married to appellant-accused Mukesh within seven years of her death. Appellant-accused Krishna Bai is mother-in-law of the deceased. According to prosecution, appellants along with acquitted co-accused Pankaj used to harass the deceased on one pretext or other for the sake of dowry. On 3-5-95 the deceased was tortured and electric wire was tied up to her feet, which was connected to electric heater; thereafter, she was set to fire by pouring kerosene oil on her.3. Police received complaint by phone regarding burning of the hous...
Tag this Judgment!Munnalal Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ2607; 2002(3)MPHT352
ORDERS.L. Kochar, J. 1. By this common order, both the revision petitions i.e., Cr. R. No. 134/2002 and Cr.R. No. 135/2002 are being disposed of. 2. Cr. Revision No. 134/2002 has been filed by the applicant against the order dated 16-7-2001 passed by J.M.F.C., Indore in Criminal Case No. 5852/99 whereby rejecting the application to discharge the applicant. The second revision i.e., Cr. R. No. 135/2002 has been filed by the applicant against the order passed by J.M.F.C., Indore in Criminal Case No. 5852/99 by which the charge under Sections 419, 467 and 471, IPC has been framed. Against the applicant Munnalal the police of Police Station, Juni Indore Distt. Indore filed chargesheet under Sections 419, 467 and 471, IPC on the allegations that the accused belongs to Brahmin caste. By mis-representing, obtained false and forged caste certificate i.e., Kori and used the same for obtaining service in Bank Note Press, Dewas. He filed application before the Trial Court contending that similar ...
Tag this Judgment!Yunus Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2002
Reported in: 2002(3)MPHT285
ORDERS.L. Kochar, J.This order also governs the disposal of the aforesaid Criminal Revision.1. The aforesaid revisions have been filed by the applicants challenging the order passed by the Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act, Mandsaur deciding the application of the applicants filed under Section 84 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the non-applicant No. 2 Mohammad Shaffi, who was absconding and his properties were attached in pursuance of the provisions under Section 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The contention of the applicants before the Court was that the attached properties were gifted to them by oral Hiba (gift). The Trial Court has decided each and every objection separately in great detail. Before the Trial Court, non-applicant No. 2 Mohd. Shaffi was neither appeared personally nor represented by any agent or Counsel to prove that he had gifted all his properties to the applicants. For the first time he has been represented here through Mr. Saraswat, Advocate who subm...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammed Zarif Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ3224; 2002(4)MPLJ359
ORDERS.L. Kochar, J.1. This order also governs the disposal of Criminal Revision Nos. 38/02 to 41/02 and Cri. Rev. Nos. 63/02 to 64/02.2. All the aforesaid Criminal revisions have been filed by the applicant against the order passed by the trial Court rejecting the objection filed under Section 84 of the Code of Criminal Procedure about attachment of the property owned by Non-applicant No. 2 Mohd. Shakir. The objectors have submitted that as it was a joint property in Criminal Revision No. 41/01, the applicant Shamina Bano, wife of Mohd. Shakir has submitted before the trial Court that it was the property given to her in MEHAR. In Criminal Revision No. 63/02, submission of the applicant was that the property involved in this case was the joint property by the applicant. In all these three revisions, applicant and Mohd. Shakir, respondent No. 2 have submitted before this Court that since the properties were joint properties and in one revision it is a property of Shamina Bano given in M...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Baburao Patil Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-23-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ3364
S.P. Khare, J.1. Appellant-Ramesh Patil has been convicted under Section 306, I.P.C. for abetting the commission of suicide by his wife and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to a fine of Rs. 5000/-.2. It is not in dispute that deceased-Aruna whose parents had died earlier was married to accused-Ramesh Patil in the year 1991 after the death of his first wife. They had a son aged about 1 1/2 years. On 28-11-1994 Aruna sustained extensive burn injuries. There were 55% burns on her body. She died on 4-12-1994 in Burhanpur Government Hospital.3. The prosecution case is that the accused was treating his wife Aruna with cruelty. He used to beat hear. On the date of incident he assaulted her with a stick. She wanted to go to the house of her brother in village Bhita and the accused did not allow her to go there. She was so much terrified that she brought an end to her life by pouring kerosene on her and setting her on fire. Thus the accused abetted the commission of suicid...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »