Madhya Pradesh Court February 2004 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.
Gulabchand Modi Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)MPHT394; 2005(1)MPLJ194
ORDERS.K. Pande, J.1. By this petition under Section 482 of Cr.PC, petitioner requests for quashing of proceedings of Criminal Case No. 907/88 pending in the Court of CIM, Hoshangabad.2. Petitioner is a retailer and having purchased 100 sealed tins of Soyabean Oil from Dinesh Traders, Siyaganj, Indore under warranty, stored it for sale. The Food Inspector on 31-8-87 opening the sealed tin obtained the sample for analysis. A part of sample was sent to the public analyst and as per report it was found adulterated. At the time of taking sample from the petitioner, the bill dated 11 -8-87 containing warranty was handed over to the Food Inspector. On enquiry Dinesh Traders disclosed that the Soyabean Oil was manufactured by Gujarat Co-operative Oil Seeds and Growers Federation, Bhavnagar, Gujarat. Acomplaint under Section 7/16-P.F.A. Act accordingly has been filed against the petitioner Gulabchand Modi, Dinesh Traders Siyaganj, Indore. Since the appearance of Dinesh Traders could not have b...
Lakhan Singh Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-04-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ2642; 2004(2)MPHT153
A.K. Shrivastava, J.1. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21-7-2000 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Pichore, District Shivpuri in Sessions Trial No. 235/99 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Sections 376(1), 341 and 506 Later Part of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC) and has been directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment of seven years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default further imprisonment of one month under Section 376, IPC and to suffer one month rigorous imprisonment for Section 341, IPC and further one year rigorous imprisonment for Section 506 Later Part of the IPC, the appellant has knocked the door of this Court under Section 376 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by preferring an appeal.2. Sans unnecessary details the facts lie in narrow compass, that on 7-7-99 at 12 in the noon prosecutrix was coming back from hospital in a tractor. She alighted at Village Masori and was going on foot to her village, on...
Ramlal Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-04-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC102; 2004(2)MPHT140; 2005(2)MPLJ14
S.L. Kochar, J.1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and finding dated 26-9-1995 passed by IInd Addl. Sessions Judge, Ujjain in S.T. No. 222/92, whereby convicted the appellant under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC, sentenced to R.I. for life and two years with fine of Rs. 500/-; in default of payment of fine further two months additional sentence, the appellant has filed this appeal. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. Briefly stated the prosecution case before? Trial Court was that on 18-1-1991 Satyanarayan (P.W, 13) has lodged a report which was recorded in Rojnamcha Sanha (daily diary) No. 612 at 3.40 P.M. vide Ex. P-24. According to this report, the wife of the appellant had eloped with one Gopichand Koushal on 18-12-1990. Thereafter appellant and witness Satyanarayan brought her hack from Dewas after pacifying her. When at 3.00 p.m. Satyanarayan reached at the well of Ramlal to see Kalabai, Kalabai was not present there and Ramlal informed him that she had...
Lakhan Singh and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-04-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ2473; 2004(2)MPHT146; 2004(2)MPLJ320
1. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order ofsentence dated 28-2-2000 passed by learned IInd Addl. Sessions Judge, As-hoknagar, Distt. Guna in Sessions Trial No. 348/1998, the appellants havepreferred this appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973. Learned Trial Court convicted the appellants and passed the sentencesagainst them as under :--NameOffenceSentence(i)Shivraj363, IPC5 years' R.I. with fine of Rs. 1000/- in default one year's R.I.366A, IPC7 years' R.I. with fine of Rs. 1000/- in default one year's R.I.376, IPCSeven year's RI with fine of Rs. 1000/-in default, one year's R.I.(ii)Lakhan363, IPC5 Year's R.I. with fine of Rs. 1000/- in default one year's R.I.366A, IPCSeven years' R.I. with fine of Rs. 1000/-in default, one year.'s R.I.118, IPCFive years' R.I. with fine of Rs. 1000/- in default one year's R.I.(iii)Rani Bai Raghuvanshi118, IPCFive years' R.I. with fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default R.I. for one year.(iv)Pran Singh118, IPCFive yea...
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Dinesh and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-04-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)MPHT132
ORDERS.L. Kochar, J.1. This reference has been made by the learned IV Addl. Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Mhow, under Section 395 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'), for decision on the following questions of law, arose before him when the file reached before the learned Fast Track Court on transfer from the Court of the then learned Second Additional Sessions Judge for further trial and disposal:--(1) Arising out of omission to determine status of approver Baboolal (witness or accused) by Sessions Court.(2) Omission to decide application dated 11-6-99 of Addl. Govt. Pleader to prosecute approver for giving false evidence.(3) Contravention of Section 308 (Proviso), Cr.PC.2. Short resume of the facts necessary for determination of the questions raised by the learned Fast Track Court (Trial Court) may be stated thus :--(a) The police of Police Station, Badgonda, Tehsil Mhow, filed a charge-sheet for the offences under Sections 302, 201, 202 and...
Saradig Die Casters Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. M.P. Financial Corporation ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-04-2004
Reported in: III(2004)BC276; [2004]56SCL82(MP)
ORDERA.M. Sapre, J.1. This petition is filed for claiming following three reliefs in the form of seeking mandamus against the respondent i.e. M.P.F.G. under Article 226 of the Constitution of India:'7(i) A writ, direction order as in the nature of mandamus or as deemed fit be issued directing the respondent No. 1 to settle the liability of the petitioners as per its rehabilitation and settlement norms after giving credit for the value of the assets taken over by it and the balance amount standing to the credit of the petitioners be utilised to meet the liability of the respondent No. 2 and other creditors of the petitioners.(ii) That the respondent No. 2 be directed to recover and receive its dues from the respondent No. 1 out of the amount which is payable by the respondent No. 1 to the petitioners on account of the assets of the petitioners taken over by the respondent No. 1.(iii) That the respondent No. 1 be directed to pay interest to the petitioners on the amount found to be due t...
Premlal Alias Prem Narayan Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-04-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1145
S.L. Jain, J.1. Appellant Dhoor Singh stands convicted for offence punishable under Section 366, IPC and sentence to R.I. for five years with fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default whereof to R.I. for three months. He has further been convicted for offence punishable under Section 376(2)(f), IPC and sentenced to R.I. for ten years with fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default whereof to R.I. for one year, vide the impugned judgment and order dated 26-5-2001 passed by Sessions Judge, Raisen in Sessions Trial No. 128/2000.2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 22-6-2000, prosecutrix Dhanno alias Dhanwati (PW-4) had gone to forest to collect Gullis. She was accompanied by Saraswati alias Ghuttal (PW-3) and Bhuriya Bai (PW-2). At about 2.30 p.m. when the three girls were collecting Gullis, appellant Dhoor Singh reached there. He was armed with bow and arrows. He caught hold of the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix pulled her hands and tried to escape. The other girls accompanying her also tried to escape bu...
Ram Vilas Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-03-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ2903; 2004(2)MPHT135
A.K. Shrivastava, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Guna in Sessions Trial No. 240/1994, whereby, appellant has been convicted under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC) and has been sentenced to suffer R.I. for seven years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default three months further R.I., the appellant has knocked the doors of this Court by preferring an appeal under Section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.2. The facts leading to this appeal lie in a narrow compass. According to the case of prosecution, on 10-6-1994, at about 10 A.M., prosecutrix was washing the clothes on the bank of river, at that juncture, nobody was present there. Appellant at the relevant point of time came there and hugged her. Thereafter, she was thrown on the ground and was ravished by him. During the course of rape, bangles of the prosecutrix were broken. Appellant after satisfying her dirty thirs...
Baldeo Prasad Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-03-2004
Reported in: [2004(102)FLR478]; 2004(2)MPHT250; 2004(2)MPLJ536
ORDERDipak Misra, J.1.The petitioner was appointed in the post of Patwari on 3-9-1964. Vide order dated 2-3-1996 he was compulsorily retired. The order was passed on 1-3-1996 asking the petitioner to handover the charge. It is urged in the petition that the respondent No. 2 issued a notice on 1-3-1996 requiring the petitioner to clarify the discrepancy that had crept in his service-book due to overwriting. The petitioner submitted a detailed reply on 2-3-1996.2. According to the writ petition, his date of birth is 20-4-1940 as per the service book but his school leaving certificate shows it to be 1-1-1932. The petitioner filed series of documents in support of the proof that his date of birth is 20-4-1940. The respondent No. 2 without holding any inquiry and ascribing cogent reasons retired the petitioner on 2-3-1996. It is contended that the said order passed vide Annexure A-1 is illegal and invalid as the same is done without holding an inquiry. In this backdrop the prayer has been m...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-03-2004
Reported in: (2004)189CTR(MP)187; [2004]270ITR62(MP)
ORDERKumar Rajaratnam, C.J.1. This is a reference filed by the Revenue under Section 256(2) of the IT Act.2. The facts very briefly are that the assessee/non-applicant filed a return for the year 1987-88 on a total income of Rs. 1,82,530 claiming the status of firm. The AO in the assessment proceedings under Section 185(1)(b) of the IT Act, 1961 treated the firm to be unregistered firm on the ground that the profits were not distributed in accordance with the terms of the partnership deed. It was also noticed by the AO that there was some inter-knitting dispute between the partners. The assessment order is before us at Annex. P/1.3. In the appeal filed by the assessee, the appellate authority set aside the order of the ITO and held that the firm is a registered firm. The order of the appellate authority is before us at Annex. P/2.4. The Revenue felt aggrieved and filed an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal by order dt. 24th July, 1996 (Annex. P/3). It is in t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »