Madhya Pradesh Court January 2012 Judgments

Roopa @ Ramroop Vs. State of M.P.

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: 2012CrLJ320(NOC)

Sheel Nagu, J. Case Diary is perused. Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard. This is third application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by the applicant for grant of bail. Applicant has been arrested in connection with crime No. 170/2010 registered at Police Station Sabalgarh, District Morena (M.P.) u/Ss. 341, 294, 354, 302, 323, 324 and 506B of IPC and Section 3(1)11, 3(2)(5) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 on 23/07/2010, since when applicant is in judicial custody. The last bail application M. Cr. C. No. 3037/2011 was rejected on 06/09/2011 as having been withdrawn. Learned counsel for applicant has contended that new circumstances arisen in favour of the applicant after rejection of the said application on 06/09/2011 is inordinate and unexplained delay in the criminal trial pending against the applicant for the reasons not attributable to the applicant. Learned counsel for applicant read over the ordersheets dated 04/07/2011, 30/07/201...

Choithram Hospital and Research Centre, Manik Bagh Road, Indore Vs. As ...

Court: Madhya Pradesh

ORDER Shantanu Kemkar, J. 1. This writ appeal is filed against the order dated 08.02.2011 passed by the Single Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.12271/2010. 2. Brief facts necessary for disposal of this writ appeal may be stated, as under: - The appellant-Hospital and Research Centre had filed the aforesaid writ petition challenging the order dated 28.05.2010 passed by the first respondent-Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Indore by which the appellant's objection against re-opening of the case, in which an order was passed under Section 7-A of the Employees Provident Fund Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short, the Act) was rejected. 3. Before dealing with the order impugned in this appeal, it would be appropriate to mention that prior to filing of the aforesaid writ petition, Writ Petition No.5300/2008 was filed by the appellant, which was disposed of with liberty to the appellant to seek appropriate remedies against the orders dated 27.11.2007 and 11.08.2008. There...

O.T.G. Global Finance Ltd. and Others Vs. Mohan Mandelia and Others

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: 2012CrLJ2008

G.D. Saxena, J. (1) As the grievance raised in the aforesaid two petitions is identical and same, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order. (2) For facility of reference, facts are being taken from Misc. Cri.Case No. 7348/11. (3) Present petition (Misc. Cri. Case No. 7348/11) is preferred by the petitioners/accused under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. having been aggrieved by an Order dated 26th September, 2011. By the aforesaid order, the petitioner/accused No1. OTG Global Finance Ltd. Company was acquitted of the charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act while setting aside the sentence for the alleged offence. However, the conviction recorded by the trial Magistrate and affirmed by the Appellate Court against the petitioners No.2 and 3 for the offence alleged was maintained with sentence of imprisonment of one month suffered by them. While summing up, it was also directed in para 34 of the order impugned which is extracted below:- “(34) Having re...

Ram Singh and Others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh

Court: Madhya Pradesh

U.C. MAHESHWARI J. 1. This appeal is directed by the appellants under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the judgment dated 9.10.96 passed by the IInd Addl. Sessions Judge, Katni in S.T.No.45/91 convicting the appellant No.1 under section 326 and 325/34 of the IPC while appellants No.2 and 3 under section 326/34 and 325/34 of IPC for RI 5 years with fine of Rs.250 in the earlier sections and RI 2 years with fine of Rs.250/- in the later. In default of depositing the fine amount further RI one month has been awarded on each of the count. 2. The facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that on dated 16.10.90 at about 11.20 AM, complainant Vishambhar Singh lodged the FIR Crime No.215/90 at P.S Barhi contending that today in the morning at about 10 O' Clock he accompanied with his son Tejbhan and his harwaha, Dhanu Kol and Satiya Kol went to plow his field. At about 10 O' Clock, when he was sitting in the field while the aforesaid other three persons were plowing the fie...

Sanjay S/O Kailashchandra Upadhyay Vs. Smt. Santosh Sanjay Upadhyay

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Order Shantanu Kemkar, J. This first appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short the Act) has been filed by the husband challenging the judgment and decree dated 29.11.2008 passed by District Judge, Neemuch in Hindu Marriage Case No.32-C/2007whereby the  appellant's application under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Act seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty has been dismissed. 2. Brief facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are stated as under. 3. The appellant husband had filed an application under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Act before the District Judge, Neemuch seeking divorce from the respondent wife on the ground that after the solemnisation of his marriage on 04.05.1998 with the respondent she started treating him with cruelty. He averred that after their marriage, from the very beginning her behaviour with him and his parents was extremely cruel and irresponsible. She used to fight with him and even with his parents for no reason. She never prepared ...

Aabida Begam Vs. Iqbal Ahmed

Court: Madhya Pradesh

Reported in: 2012CrLJ1517

1. The petitioner has preferred this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 26.11.2010 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shahdol (Shri Jagdish Prasad Parashar) in Criminal Revision No.38/2010 by which the revision petition was dismissed and the order dated 30.3.2010 passed in MJC No.161/2009 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Shahdol (Smt. Sashi Singh) was confirmed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was granted maintenance of Rs.200/- per month vide order dated 15.7.1985. It was also admitted that the respondent did not pay the maintenance amount since the year 2007, and therefore the petitioner had approached the concerned JMFC for recovery of the maintenance amount. The respondent filed an application under Section 125(3) of Cr.P.C. with the pretext that since the petitioner was a divorcee muslim woman, she was not entitled for any maintenance and consequently the JMFC Shahdol vide order dated 30.3.2010 accepted the objection rais...