Madhya Pradesh Court May 2003 Judgments
Yashwant and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-26-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1930; 2003(3)MPHT280; 2004(1)MPLJ481
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, Vacation Judge 1. Heard Shri Sharad Verma, learned Counsel for the applicants on the question of admission.2. This Criminal Revision has been filed under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the order dated 25-4-2003 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Harda in Sessions Trial No. 103/2001 whereby the learned Trial Judge dismissed the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311, Cr.PC3. By filing the aforesaid application the accused petitioners prayed before the Trial Court that the witness Dr. Kishore Kumar be recalled for further cross-examination as according to the petitioners some important questions regarding procedure adopted by him for recording the dying declaration has to be asked as the same could not be asked out of hot haste.4. The Trial Court after due consideration of the aforesaid application submitted on behalf of the petitioners rejected the same by holding that Dr. Kishore Kumar has already been cross-examined by ...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. B.M. Shukla Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-26-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)MPHT373; 2003(4)MPLJ18
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, J.1. Heard Shri Vijay Naik, learned Counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission.2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has called in question the order of the State Government (Annexure P-1) by which the respondent No. 4 Dr. S.M. Shukla has been ordered to be given the 'charge' of the post of Chief Medical and Health Officer, Satna.3. As per Counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was holding the charge of the said post from 16-9-2002 because of retirement of the then Chief Medical and Health Officer Dr. K.B. Singh. Admittedly, the petitioner was not holding the substantive post of Chief Medical and Health Officer, Satna but was only holding the 'current work charge' of the said post because of retirement of the officer.4. The submission of the Counsel for the petitioner is that, Dr. S.M. Shukla cannot be given 'charge' of the said post as he is not qualified because he is merely a Child Spe...
Tag this Judgment!Sukhdev Prasad Verma Vs. Pappan Khan @ Sheikh Ameen and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-26-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)MPHT362; 2003(4)MPLJ11
ORDERShantanu Kemkar, Vacation J.1. Heard Shri K.P. Kushwaha, learned Counsel for the applicant on the question of admission.2. By filing this revision under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the petitioner complainant has called in question the order dated 4-4-2003 passed in Sessions Trial No. 186/2001 by Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa rejecting the application under Section 319 of the Cr.PC for arraying Pappan, Sharda Pasi, Nasim Khan Ramesh Kevat as accused.3. The prosecution case as has been observed by the Trial Court is based upon the suicidal note of Sanno. In the suicidal note there is no allegation against these persons so as to include them as accused for commission of offence under Section 306 of the IPC. The Trial Court has considered the evidence recorded during the trial and has found that there is no enough material to show that these persons were involved in any manner regarding commission of offence and there is no indication in the suicidal note a...
Tag this Judgment!Tej Khan and anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-19-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ276; 2003(4)MPLJ581
S.L. Jain, J.1. Appellants/accused being aggrieved by the judgment of ;conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur, in S. T. No. 112./ 1997, have filed this appeal challenging the correctness, propriety and validity of the findings and sentence.2. By the impugned judgment the appellant Tej Khan has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 376(1) of the I.P.C. for having committed rape on a minor girl, namely Haseena, aged 11 years. The appellant Gafooran has been convicted for offence punishable under Section 376 read with Section 120B of the I.P.C., as she entered into a conspiracy with appellant Tej Khan for the commission of rape on the said girl. Both of them have been sentenced to R. I. for ten years and pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default they are to undergo further R.I. for one year each.3. Succinctly narrated, the prosecution case is as follows :Prosecutrix Haseena is daughter of Rasool Mansoori, resident of Isha Nagar. On 10-4-97 Hasee...
Tag this Judgment!Dilip Kumar Goushalawale and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)MPHT217; 2003(1)MPLJ504
Dipak Misra, J.1. Invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent, the appellants, five in number, have called in question the defensibility of the order dated 31-7-2002 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 3330/99 = 2002(4) M.P.H.T. 514 and penetrability of the order dated 25-2-2002 passed in M.C.C. No. 1071 of 2002.2. The facts which are necessitous to be adumbrated are the appellants (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioners') preferred the aforesaid writ petition to direct the respondents to consider the representation submitted under Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for brevity 'the Act') and further to quash the notifications issued under Section 4(1) read with Section 17(1) and notification issued under Section 6 of the Act and the award passed under Section 11 of the Act. The said documents were brought on record as Annexures P-10 to P-11. Apart from that there was prayer for quashment of Annexures P-27 and P-28. It is rel...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sudharani Agrawal Vs. Surendra and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)MPHT364; 2003(3)MPLJ563
ORDERS.K. Pande, J.1. Being aggrieved by the order dated 16-12-2002, passed by ADJ, Jabalpur in C.S. No. 1-B/2001 allowing the application under Section 151, CPC for stay of suit, this revision under Section 115, CPC is preferred by the petitioner.2. Madhu was married to respondent Surendra. Respondent Ashadevi, Basant Kumar, Ramkumar and Shiv Kumar are family members of respondent Surendra Kumar. As a result of harassment and demand of dowry, Madhu committed suicide on 19-4-2000. Therefore, on a complaint made to the police, criminal case was registered against the respondents. Respondents were tried in S.T. No. 194/2000, Court of ASJ, Jabalpur for offence under Sections 498A and 304B of IPC. Vide judgment dated 27-8-2001 respondents were acquitted of the charge under Section 304B, IPC. However, respondents Surendra and Smt. Ashadevi on conviction under Section 498, IPC, were sentenced to R.I. for a period of three years and pay fine of Rs. 5,000/-. Against the conviction and sentence...
Tag this Judgment!M.P. Electricity Board Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and or ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2003
Reported in: (2004)IILLJ40MP; 2004(1)MPLJ168
ORDERArun Mishra, J.1. Petitioner, Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board is challenging the order P. 11 passed by the Employees' Provident Fund Commissioner, directing to transfer amount to the 'Trust' for individual credit in employees' accounts, failing which the Department shall be free to recover the amount as per Section 8 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the EPF Act'). The order P. 11 is passed on May 13, 2002.2. The fact is not in dispute that MPEB is a statutory Corporation constituted under Section 5 of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948. The Board has framed the regulations under Section 79. The Board in exercise of the powers under Section 79 has framed the regulations P. 1 called as Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board's Contributory and General Provident Fund Regulations, published on March 27, 1953, which came into force w.e.f. April 1, 1952. The provident fund shall be held by the Board and administered by the '...
Tag this Judgment!State of Madhya Pradesh and anr. Vs. Jangvali Singh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2003
Reported in: 2004(3)MPHT406
Dipak Misra, J.1. Almost four centuries back it was proclaimed with an intense dramatic overtone by one of the centripodal characters of Websterian tragedy :'on pain of death do not name death to me it is a word infinitely terrible'If we further travel in the time machine and penetrate deeper into the ancient sayings one would come across a sensitive observation, an unforgettable one, leaving an unfailing impact on the mind :'Chita, chinta dwayoormadhya, Chinta tatra gariyasi, Chita dahati nirjivam Chinta dahati Sajeevakam'2. We have said so in the beginning because it was in a way imperative and exigent to say so as we are obligated at this juncture to deal with the reference made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panna in Sessions Trial No. 30/98 for confirmation of death sentence imposed on the accused, namely, Jangvali Singh and Rohini and further to deal with the appeals on merits preferred at their instance. Before we advert to cogitate on the factual depiction that has g...
Tag this Judgment!Anand Moghe Vs. Chairman, Special Area Development Authority and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-15-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)MPHT503; 2003(3)MPLJ493
ORDERS.P. Khare, J.1. This is a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order by which the services of the petitioner have been terminated.2. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was appointed as Lower Division Clerk by the Chief Executive Officer of the Special Area Development Authority, Harda by order dated 26-8-1988 (Annexure A). In this order it is mentioned that the petitioner would be on probation for two years and his services can be terminated at any time without assigning any reason. This probation period was extended by order dated 31-8-1990 (Annexure B) for a period of one year. His services were terminated by order dated 15-11-1990 (Annexure C) on the ground that he was appointed without following the prescribed procedure.3. The petitioner's case is that he was appointed after regular interview and he was qualified for the post. According to him, his services have been terminated because he was appointed at the time when th...
Tag this Judgment!Govind Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: May-15-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)MPHT362
S.K. Seth, J.1. This order shall also govern the disposal of Criminal Revision No. 3/1993, which has been filed by Nathuram son of the deceased against the acquittal of the appellant from the charge of an offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC in Sessions Trial No. 353/1990.2. Being aggrieved by the judgment passed in Sessions Trial No. 353/1990, appellant has preferred this appeal. Learned Trial Court has handed down the conviction and sentence of 4 years R.I. with fine of Rs. 1,000/- for having committed an offence punishable under Section 325 of the IPC.3. According to the prosecution, on 19-10-1990 at about 5.30 in the evening, when the resident of Village Sagwal were observing rituals of 'Goyari', a local festival celebrated after Dipawali, an altercation took place between appellant and Gangaram. During the altercation when appellant tried to hit Gangaram with lathi, Poona, intervened in the matter, as a result the appellant dealt a lathi blow to deceased Poona and ran a...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »