Madhya Pradesh Court June 2009 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.
Kuldeep Singh Jat Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-22-2009
Reported in: 2010CriLJ166
S.L. Kochar, J.1. The appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. against the impugned judgment and order passed by learned Special Judge (NDPS), Jabalpur in Special Case No. 20/2001 judgment dated 29-9-2003 whereby convicted the appellant under Section 8/20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act sentenced to undergo R.I. for 17 years and fine of Rs. 2 lacs in default whereof to undergo R.I. for 4 years.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case as unfolded before the trial Court that on 3-3-2001, Station House Officer C.R. Patel (PW-7) on receiving information from informer that in truck No. PB-23/9265, Ganja after loading was to be transported from Vishakhapatnam to Rewa via Jabalpur. This information was recorded vide Ex. P. 6 and one Sanju Pandey was appraised of the information. Station House Officer proceeded in search and checked the truck after making entry in daily diary vide Ex. P/22. On that day, truck did not come on particu...
Ramla Rusiya (Smt.) Vs. State of M.P. and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)MPHT205
ORDERR.C. Mishra, J.1. Heard on admission.2. This is an application under Section 378(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of leave to appeal against the order of acquittal in respect of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The corresponding judgment was passed on 24-8-2006 by Shri A.K. Pandey, JMFC, Satna in Criminal Case No. 1101/2005. In that case, cognizance of the offence was taken upon a complaint made by the applicant. It contained the following averments:The respondent is the Proprietor of a Firm that carries business in the name of M/s Vaibhav Enterprises. On behalf of the Firm, the respondent borrowed an amount of Rs. 1 lakh from the applicant and for repayment thereof issued a post dated cheque for an amount of Rs. 1 lakh. However, the cheque was dishonoured by the Bank. He sent a notice of demand by registered post, but it was returned with the remark that the addressee had refused to accept it. Thereafter, the responde...
Smt. Sushila Devi and ors. Vs. Registrar, High Court of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-19-2009
Reported in: AIR2009MP260
Dipak Misra, J.1. The petitioners, legal representatives of Late Mahesh Singh Jaudan, an Assistant Sub-Inspector, have invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for grant of compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/- for his untimely death in the Court premises at Gwalior which was earlier situated at Jayendra Ganj, Lashkar wherein the High Court and the District Court were functioning in the same campus, the High Court in the first floor and the District judiciary on the ground floor.2. The expose of facts are that on 4-7-1998, Late Mahesh Singh Jaudan had gone to the Court premises as he had to attend the Court duty in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gwalior about 2:30 p.m., while he was standing in front of the concerned Court, an iron pipe approximately 40 ft. in length and 5 inches in diameter fitted in the wall fell on his head as a consequence of which he sustained grievous injuries on his head, left shoulder and right leg an...
Sumati Jain, Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh Through the Police Statio ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-18-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)MPHT495
Rakesh Saksena, J.1. Appellants have filed this appeal against the judgment dated 22.2.2003, passed by the Additional Judge to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Sihora, district Jabalpur in Sessions Trial No. 748/01 convicting them under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for seven years 2. The facts as alleged by the prosecution are that accused Sumati Jain was married to Mukta Jain (Deceased) on 18.5.2001 according to the customs and rites of Jain community. At the time of marriage, Rs. 51,000/-cash, almirah, cooler, bed etc. were given in the dowry. On 31.5.2001, Mukta was brought back from her in-laws house by her brothers. For 2-3 days, when the inmates of the house saw her sad, they asked for its reason. She disclosed that her husband Sumati Jain, his elder brothers Jinendra and Surendra and mother-in-law Pyari Bai used to say that they did not get sufficient dowry. They expected Colour T.V., Sofa-set and motorcycle in the do...
Champat Giri Vs. Ramdayal and anr.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-16-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)MPHT285
P.K. Jaiswal, J.1. This first appeal has been filed by the defendant against the judgment and decree dated 07-04-2000 passed by First Additional District Judge, Baitul in Civil Suit No. 71-A/1998, whereby the trial Court decreed the suit for specific performance of contract and permanent injunction, filed by the plaintiff/respondent. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent/plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of contract and permanent injunction on the ground that he entered into an agreement on 14-06-1997 (Ex.P/1) with the appellant for sale of an area of 1.619 hectare plus 'Aa' portion of the well and way out of total area of 2.428 hectare of survey No. 266/1, Patwari Halka No. 52 of Village Jamathi of Tahsil Bhenshdehi District Baitul for a consideration of Rs. 2 lakh. An agreement was reduced in writing on a stamp paper of Rs. 50/-. At the time of execution of the agreement entire sale consideration of Rs. 2 lakh was paid to the appellant. It is also alleged t...
Raj Kumar Agrawal Alias Rajju Vs. Ku. Sadhna and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-16-2009
Reported in: 2009(5)MPHT199
ORDERP.K. Jaiswal, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the owner of the offending vehicle against the award dated 14-8-1997 passed by Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mandla in Claim Case No. 50/91, thereby the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 10,076/- as compensation to the respondent No. 1/claimant and gave a finding in Para 14 of the impugned award that at the time of accident, Le., on 25-3-1991 the vehicle was not insured with the respondent No. 3-Insurance Company and directed that the appellant and respondent No. 2 are liable to pay the amount of compensation.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant drew my attention to the order sheet dated 18-2-1995 and Para 2 of the written statement filed by the appellant and submitted that appellant very categorically stated that on the date of accident vehicle was insured with the respondent No. 3. Along with the written statement, he filed photocopy of the policy by which offending vehicle No. MPJ-8727 was insured with the respo...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›