Madhya Pradesh Court June 2011 Judgments
Dr. Ashok Virang Vs. State of M.P. and Others
Court: Madhya Pradesh Indore
Decided on: Jun-30-2011
1. Although one of us namely (Hon'ble Shri Justice Shantanu Kemkar) has decided to recuse from the case, we both are of the definite opinion that the matter is to be brought on the floor because it is an illustrative case of professional mischief, by seeking stay before Judge of this Court sitting alone as vacation Judge of consent order passed by the Division Bench of this Court, without making a request to Hon'ble the Chief Justice for constitution of Division Bench for hearing of the matter, and also by avoiding available Division Bench on various dates during Court's summer vacation but by making mention without there being applications for vacational hearing and urgent hearing on review petition on merits. No date for listing was specified in the mention memo so that presumably the matter could be got listed before vacational Single Judge (during non-availability of vacational Division Bench during Court's summer vacation) who had no jurisdiction to hear the review under the High ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Akhtyar and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh Gwalior
Decided on: Jun-29-2011
(1) This revision petition under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 has been preferred against an order dated 25 th May, 2010 passed in Sessions Case No. 49/03 by the Fifth Additional Sessions Judge, Morena, dismissing thereby the application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. for examination of prosecution witness Satish Chandra Dubey, the Investigating Officer of Crime No. 359/2001 registered at Police Station, Morena for commission of offence under Sections 302, 207, 147, 148, 149 and 294 of I.P.C. against the petitioners/accused and after investigation submitted Final Report before the Criminal Court. The prosecution in trial had given up him for proving the contradictions and omissions in the statements of material prosecution witnesses of the case. (2) The facts, in short just for decision of this petition, are that on 12th September 2001 at Ambah bye-pass road near dried Pipal tree, accused Ram Akhtyar, Hari Kishan, Balkishan, Ram Aautar and Shiv Aautar caused deat...
Tag this Judgment!Sakir Mewati and Another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh Gwalior
Decided on: Jun-28-2011
(1) This revision petition under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act 2000, read with Sections 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, has been preferred against an order dated 16 th March 2011 in Criminal Case No. 25/2011 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge Guna, holding after conducting an inquiry that the petitioners are not juveniles. (2) The facts necessary for the disposal of this petition are that on 6 th December 2011 at Town of Raghogarh, District Guna, one Deepak Soni, s/o Babulal Soni was reported to be missing from his house. Said report was recorded in Rojnamcha of the police Station. During search on 8/12/10, the dead body of Deepak Soni in a gunny beg was found under beneath of culvert of ITI at Raghogarh. Accordingly, Marg report was registered. During inquiry, it appeared that the accused including petitioners committed murder of missing Deepak Soni and caused the evidence of offence to be disappeared with an intent...
Tag this Judgment!Tulsiram Narwariya Vs. Mahesh Chandra
Court: Madhya Pradesh Gwalior
Decided on: Jun-24-2011
1. This petition under section 482 of Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner is directed against the order dated 3 rd of February,2007 passed by the Sessions Judge, Gwalior in Criminal Revision No.325/06 whereby the order dated 06 th October, 2006 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gwalior in a complaint case under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 has been affirmed. 2. A complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,1881 ( herein after, referred to as the “Act”) filed b y the petitioner against the respondent was accompanied with an application under section 142 (b) of the Act for condonation of the delay of 28 days in filing the complaint. The delay was sought to be condoned on the ground that the petitioner being the only son of his father could not file the complaint in time as his father had suffered a fracture for which a medical certificate was also annexed with the condonation application. The delay in filing the compla...
Tag this Judgment!State of M.P. and Others Vs. Puran Lal Nihar
Court: Madhya Pradesh Gwalior
Decided on: Jun-22-2011
1. This appeal raises an important question of law; Whether the disciplinary proceedings initiated by the government against a government employee after his retirement automatically comes to an end in case the enquiry is not concluded within two years of its inception. The earlier Division Bench of this court in the case of State of M.P. v. R.L.Ogale 2006 (1) M.P.L.J.412 has taken a view that if the departmental proceedings initiated by the government are not concluded within two years of its inception, the Governor can not pass any final order for recovery of pecuniary loss caused to the department by the delinquent government employee and this view was taken by the earlier Division Bench in view of Clause (b) of third proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 9 of M.P.Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976. 2. Shri Vivek Khedkar, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants has argued that the earlier Division Bench judgment of this court in R.N.Ogale's case (supra) is per i...
Tag this Judgment!Pushpendra Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh Gwalior
Decided on: Jun-21-2011
(1) This appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 has been preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 3 rd August 2006 passed in Special Sessions trial No. 22/2006 by the Special Judge (MPDVPK), Shuivpuri (M.P.), convicting him for offence punishable under Sections 392/34 read with Sections 397 and 412 of I.P.C. and under Section 11/13 of the MPDVPK Act and sentencing to suffer ten years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- for commission of offence under Section 392/34 read with Section 397 of I.P.C. and in default to suffer three years' additional rigorous imprisonment. No separate sentence has been awarded for commission of offence under Section 412 of I.P.C. and under section 11/13 of the MPDVPK Act. The appellant was further found guilty for commission of offence under Section 25(1-b)(A) and Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act and sentenced to suffer three years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine Rs. 2,000/- and in defau...
Tag this Judgment!M/S Simplex Structures and anr. Vs. the Controlling Authority and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-2011
1. Shri Akhilesh Jain, learned counsel for the petitioners. Shri Y. M. Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3. 2. With consent of learned counsel for the parties the matter is heard finally. 3. Challenge put forth in this petition is to an order dated 28-03-2003 passed by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, Jabalpur, in Gratuity Case No. 51 of 2002 as well as to an order dated 27-02-2004 passed by the Appellate Authority in an appeal preferred by the petitioners. 4. During the course of hearing it was expressed by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in absence of any opportunity to adduce evidence the core issues which were important to be adjudicated upon by the Controlling Authority could not be decided. 5. At this juncture learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3 submits that he has no objection if the case is remitted to the Controlling Authority for its fresh adjudication. 6. In view of the above, the impugned orders dated 28-0...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Tamrakar and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-2011
1. Challenging the order.dated 26.4.1995 – Annexure P/14, passed by the District Collector, Raisen by which an administrative order of Municipal Council, Raisen dated 19.10.1994 –Annexure P/7 and a Resolution bearing No.65 passed by Municipal Council, Raisen vide Annexure P/8 on 28.11.1994 has been suspended, this writ petition has been filed. The order passed by the Collector – Annexure P/14 is affirmed by the State Government vide Annexure P/15, on 21.11.1995 and, therefore, the order passed by the State Government is also assailed. 2. By the aforesaid impugned orders of the Collector and the State Government certain compromise entered into between the Municipal Council and the land owner in the matter of transfer of the land has been stayed as a consequence the subsequent purchase made by the petitioners and the construction on the plot land is adversely affected.The petition is pending since 1996 and while admitting the petition, the impugned action was stayed. 3....
Tag this Judgment!Ramhet Sharma Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh Gwalior
Decided on: Jun-21-2011
(1) This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 is directed against an order dated 25 th August 2010, passed in Sessions Case No. 284/2005 by the 5 th Additional Sessions Judge Morena, rejecting thereby the applicaton under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. for re-calling a witness Jayanti Prasad (PW-4), father of the deceased for his cross examination, on the subsequent discovered document with a view to establish the defence by the accused. (2) The facts in brief, just for the decision of this petition are that within seven years of marriage of the deceased Radha with Raju, she died of an unnatural death, by taking some poisonous substance. It is alleged that after marriage of the deceased, her husband and other relatives on matrimonial side used to harass and torture her for their illegal demand of dowry. On the fateful night, her husband and relatives compelled the deceased to drink some poisonous substance. Consequently, after the death of deceased, an FIR was lodg...
Tag this Judgment!C.L.ShuklA. Vs. Madhya Pradesh Rajya Krishi Vipanan Board
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2011
1. Heard. 2. This M.C.C. is for restoration of Writ Petition No. 5083/2002, which was dismissed for non- compliance of the peremptory order dated 07-11-2002. 3. The applicant/petitioner was working as Secretary, Krishi Upaj Mandi , has filed the Writ Petition No. 5083/2002 challenging the order dated 29-03-2001 and the order dated 08-01-2002. By order dated 29- 03- 2001 the petitioner was inflicted the penalty of stoppage of two increments with non- cumulative effect. The said order of punishment was upheld i n appeal by the appellate authority by its order dated 08- 01- 2002. 4. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred the writ petiti on No. 5083/2002, which was posted for admission on 20-09-2002 wherein notices were directed to be issued on petitioner's paying the process fee within a period of seven days. The petitioner admittedly, did not pay the MCC 793.11 process fee within seven days. The petition was posted on 07- 11- 2002 to remind the petitioner the default committed by ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »