Madhya Pradesh Court April 2008 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.
Ram Khiladi Gurjar Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-16-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)MPHT74
ORDERS.C. Sharma, J.1. The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution by the petitioner challenging an order dated 7th September, 2007 passed by the respondent No. 1, State of Madhya Pradesh so also order passed by the District Magistrate, Gwalior in Case No. NSA/13/07, dated 19th July, 2007 under the provisions of the National Section Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1980) detaining the petitioner for a period of one year.2. The contention of the petitioner is that he was detained on 21st July, 2007 (Annexure P-3). As per the detention order dated 21st July, 2007, twenty one cases have been detailed in the order. The petitioner in this petition has stated that in most of the cases which has been listed in the detention order, he has been acquitted and after the year 2003 only three cases have registered against him. In the year 2003 a case was registered on 14-10-2003 at Crime No. 336/03 under Sections 302,341,120B of IPC. After the year 2003...
Bhagwan Singh and ors. Vs. State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-16-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT66
A.P. Shrivastava, J.1. This appeal is directed by the appellants against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 21-1-2000 passed by the Special Judge (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes), Guna (M.P.) in Special Case No. 42/96, by which the appellants have been convicted and sentenced as under:(I) Appellants have been convicted under Section 3(1)(xv) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each with a fine of Rs. 100/- each. They have further been convicted under Section 426 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month each.(II) Appellant Bhagwan Singh has been convicted under Sections 323 and 451 of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months (on both counts) with a fine of Rs. 100/-.(HI) Appellant Kishore Singh and Indrapal Singh have been convicted under Section 323 read with Section 34 ...
Ashok Kumar and ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-16-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1546
A.M. Sapre, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short called 'the Act') against an award dated 30.4.2005 passed by the Third M.A.C.T., Ratlam and Jawra in Claim Case No. 19 of 2004. By impugned award, the Tribunal has awarded total sum of Rs. 3,42,000 for the death of one Nilesh. This appeal is filed by the claimants for enhancement as according to claimants, the compensation awarded to claimants by the Tribunal is on lower side hence it should be enhanced in this appeal. So the question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether any case is made out for enhancement in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal and, if so, to what extent and under what head(s)?2. It is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail such as how the accident occurred, who was negligent in driving the offending vehicle which caused the accident or who is liable to pay compensation, etc. and whether the offending vehicle is insured ...
Gopal and anr. Vs. Bhagwantibai and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)MPHT68
ORDERN.K. Mody, J.1. Being aggrieved by the award dated 22-12-2000 passed by I MACT, Mandsaur in Claim Case No. 6/99 whereby the claim petition filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 3 was allowed and a sum of Rs. 1,71,000/-was awarded as compensation in a death case and respondent No. 4- Insurance Company was exonerated, the present appeal has been filed.2. Short facts of the case are that respondent Nos. 1 to 3 filed a claim petition alleging that on 17-12-98, Nandlal who was husband of respondent No. 1 and father of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 was going on his panther moped from Village Hadi to Village Manasa through Pipliya, at that time tractor bearing registration No. MP 14 K 1164 which was being driven by appellant No. 1 and owned by appellant No. 2 dashed Nandlal with the result he died. It was alleged that offending tractor was insured with respondent No. 4 and the tractor was being driven rashly and negligently, therefore respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are entitled for compensation from appellant...
Bhaiyalal and ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-11-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)MPHT37
Rakesh Saksena, J.1. Appellants have filed this appeal against the judgment dated 19-11-1998 passed by the Sessions Judge, Panna, in Sessions Trial No. 78/1997, convicting them under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to imprisonment for life. Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 have further been convicted under Section 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for one month with fine of Rs. 200/-.2. It is to be noted that accused Mathura (acquitted) is 'Phoopha ' (husband of father's sister) of Badda @ Devi Dayal (deceased) and appellants Bhaiyalal, Kaura and Manja are the sons of Mathura. Betu (P.W. 1), Kallu (P.W. 2), Durga (P.W. 8) and the deceased are real brothers. Premabai (P.W. 4) and Vimlabai (P.W. 5) are the wife and daughter of the deceased.3. In short, the prosecution case is that on 8-8-1997 at about 19.00 hours, appellants alongwith accused Mathura went to the house of Badda @ Devi Dayal. Mathura called him out and admonished for h...
Devi Prasad Singh Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-10-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)MPHT471
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, C.J.1. This is the appeal filed under Section 2(1) of the M.P. Uchcha Nyayalaya (Khand Nyaypeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 against the order dated 14-12-2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No. 3883 of 2007.2. The appellant is a farmer and owns agricultural land measuring area 0.640 hectare in Khasra No. 1/1, 0.316 hectare in Khasra No. 1/2, 0.680 hectares in Khasra Nos. 159/1 and 159/2, 1.247 hectares in Khasra No. 185, 4.85 hectares in Khasra No. 185/2, and area 4.281 hectares in Khasra No. 188/2 in Village Paloha, Tehsil Kareli, District Narsinghpur, M.P. The appellant has five sons and a daughter (widow) who are all dependent on agriculture for their livelihood.3. The Central Government issued a notification dated 18-3-2005 under Sub-section (1) of Section 3A of the National Highways Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act of 1956') declaring its intention to acquire the land mentioned in the Schedule thereto for the public purposes of building (widening), main...
Sunderlal and anr. Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-10-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ3720
1. The appeal has been preferred by the accused-appellants aggrieved by judgment dated 29-7-93 delivered by 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Mandla in S.T. No. 47/90 thereby convicting the appellants for commission of offence under Section 302/34, I.P.C.2. As per the prosecution case the marriage of deceased Padma Bai was performed with Sunderlal prior to three years. Father of deceased Padma Bai had given one acre of agricultural land at the time of marriage. After death of Dulichand, father-in-law and Rikhiram the father of deceased, dispute arose with respect to the mutation of name of deceased Padma Bai over the agricultural land. The incident took place on 3-2-89. Deceased used to be harassed by the accused persons due to non-mutation of name over the agricultural land. Possession of the land was handed over to the in-laws by the brothers of deceased Padma Bai and they started cultivating the land on crop sharing basis. Brothers of Padma Bai wanted mutation of land in the name of Padma B...
Rajendra Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)MPHT501
Sushma Shrivastava, J.1. Appellant has preferred this appeal against the order of his conviction and sentence passed by Sessions Judge, Chhindwara in S.T. No. 122/91, vide judgment dated 13-5-93.2. Appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of IPC for committing murder of Sudhakar Rundhe at Village Baredi and sentenced to imprisonment for life by the impugned judgment.3. According to prosecution, appellant Rajendra and deceased Sudhakar (hereinafter to be referred as 'deceased') resided at Village Baredi in the adjacent houses. On 15-4-91 at about 7.30 in the morning, appellant entered into an altercation and quarreled with the deceased alleging that deceased had lowered the water-tap by digging a pit causing scarcity of water supply at the appellant's house. Being enraged appellant caught hold of the deceased, pushed him and fell him into nearby empty well with intent to kill him. As a result deceased Sudhakar sustained head injury and went into coma. Deceased was taken out from t...
Kalebabu Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT397
ORDERS.R. Waghmare, J.1. This revision has been filed assailing the order dated 06-08-03 passed by the 11th Additional Sessions Judge, Indore in Criminal Appeal No. 311/02 convicting the accused under Section 25(1-B)(b) of the Arms Act and upholding the sentence of one year rigorous imprisonment passed by the Trial Court.2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on the date of incident i.e., 08-02-94, an information was received at police station, Tukoganj that opposite Disneyland, Indore at around 2.10 p.m. accused Kalebabu was roaming around with an open spring knife and scaring passers-by, whereupon A.S.I. Shri Ramsharan Soni (P.W. 4) along with task force who were on the beat in the said vicinity went to the spot and found the accused wielding a spring knife without licence which was contrary to the notification issued by the State Government under 25(1-B)(b)/4 of the Arms Act and consequently, the officer proceeded to arrest the accused and the offence was registered under S...
Urmila Devi Vs. Returning Officer (Panchayat) and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(4)MPHT410
ORDERS.K. Seth, J.1. Petitioner is aggrieved by order dated 24-10-2005 passed by SDO, Indore. By the order impugned, the election petition preferred by the petitioner against Respondent No. 2 was rejected on the ground of limitation, lack of proper verification and improper presentation of the election petition.2. It is not in dispute that election to the office of Surpanch, Gram Panchayat, Chhota Bangarda, Tehsil and District Indore, were held in 2005. In the said election Respondent No. 2 secured maximum votes, therefore, she was declared elected to the office of Surpanch. Said election was challenged in an election petition filed by the petitioner. The election petition was presented on 7-3-2005 by the Counsel for the petitioner before the Competent Authority as is clear from the order-sheet filed along with this petition. After notice, the Returning Officer, Respondent No. 1 herein, filed reply which was adopted by the Respondent No. 2 as is evident from the order sheet recorded on...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »