Madhya Pradesh Court July 2012 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.
Ramesh Johari Vs. Prem Narayan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
Criminal Appeal No.76/2011 18.07.2012 Shri Kunal Dubey, Advocate for the appellant. Heard on admission. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the order dated 19.11.2010 passed by the 11th Additional District Judge, Jabalpur in MJ.No.16107/2006 whereby the application filed by the appellant under Section 340 of Cr.P.C.was dismissed. The facts of the case are that a decree was directed by the trial Court to give possession of a particular property. It is alleged that the map provided by the respondents to the Process Server was faulty, and therefore possession of the open courtyard was also given to the respondents. Forgery was done in the copy of the map by the respondents, and therefore an application under Section 340 of Cr.P.C.was moved before the trial Court that a complaint under Section 195 of Cr.P.C.for commission of offence may be prosecuted against the respondents. The learned Additional District Judge after considering the application, found that the possession was g...
Shankar Pratap Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
Criminal Appeal No.2374/2011 18.07.2012 Appellant Kasim Khan by Shri R.S.Patel, Advocate. State by Shri Umesh Pandey, learned Government Advocate. Heard on IA No.1259/2012, an application under Section 389(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for suspension of sentence. Appellant has been convicted u/s 364 and 302 Indian Penal Code for committing abduction and murder of Ishwardeen, Ramesh Singh, Malkhan Singh and Prahlad Singh and sentenced to life imprisonment and five years R.I.on four counts. According to prosecution on 3.8.2001 at about 5.00 p.m.deceased persons alongwith Ramkrishna (PW/1).Geetabai (PW/4) and Mahendra Singh (PW/6) going in a tractor, were accosted by appellant and 12 other persons. Co-accused Chhoteraja dealt a lathi blow to Lokendra Singh @ Pappu, driver of the tractor (PW/8) and they abducted four deceased persons on gunpoint. On the next day i.e.4.8.2001, dead bodies of the deceased persons were found in a field. Shri R.S.Patel, learned counsel for the appella...
M.L. Jaiswal Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
I.T.A.No.20/2011 18.7.2012 Shri Mukesh Agarwal, counsel for appellant. Shri Sanjay Lal, counsel for respondents. This appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of law :- Whether the Tribunal has committed a grave error in confirming the assessment order passed by the AO thereby sustaining the addition of Rs.1,52,304/- towards travelling expenses since in reversing the decision of CIT(A) and ITAT did not consider the fact that a similar addition made by the AO for court expenses was deleted by CIT(A).. Notice on behalf of respondents is accepted by Shri Sanjay Lal. Be listed for hearing in due course. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Vimla Jain) JUDGE JUDGE M....
Union of India Vs. M/S Maihar Cement
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
1....W.A.No.661 o18. 7.2012 Shri N.S.Ruprah with Shri Atul Choudhary, Counsels for the appellants. Shri Aditya Adhikari, Counsel for the respondents. I.A.7603/12 for dispensing with the requirement of filing certified copy of the impugned order. It is submitted by the appellants that the certified copy of the order has been filed in W.A.No.611 of 2012 and the present matter was decided along with the aforesaid case, so filing of the certified copy in this appeal may be dispensed with. Prayer is not opposed by the other side, hence the application is allowed. Appellants are exempted from filing certified copy of the impugned order in this appeal. Heard. Appeal is admitted for final hearing. Notice on behalf of the respondent is accepted by Shri Adhikari. Be listed for hearing in the 2nd week of September,2012 alongwith W.A.611 of 2012 for analogous hearing. Till next date of hearing, it is directed that operation of order passed by the learned Single Judge directing consideration of rep...
The State of M.P. Vs. Shiromani @ Sobaran
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, PRINCIPAL SEAT, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH PRESENT: HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI N. K. GUPTA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1672/1997 State of M.P. Vs. Shiromani alias Sobaran ........................................................................................................... For the appellant/State : Shri R.P. Tiwari, Public Prosecutor. For the respondent: Ku. Manisha Shrivastava ........................................................................................................... JUDGMENT (Delivered on the 18th day of July, 2012) The State has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 30.1.1997 passed by JMFC, Jatara, District Tikamgarh whereby the respondent was acquitted from the charges of offences punishable under Sections 294, 506-B of I.P.C and Section 379 of I.P.C read with Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1939.2. Prosecution's case in short is that on 1.5.1995 at about 1.30 pm, R.A. Mishra (P.W.1) Junior Engineer of MPEB went to the Village ...
Ajay Mishra Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
1 Crl.Appeal No.174/01 18.7.2012 Shri Mahendra Pateria and Shri Narayan Dubey, Counsel for appellant. It is stated by the appellant that appellant is in custody since 18.9.1999 and the aforesaid period is of more than 12 yeaRs.Though by order dated 13.12.2010, we had directed that if this appeal is not heard within a period of two months from the date of the order, the application seeking suspension of sentence and release on bail filed on behalf of appellant Ajay Mishra be placed for consideration, but from the perusal of the order-sheets, we find that after passing of the order dated 13.12.2010, the matter was not placed before the regular Bench for consideration. Why the matter is not listed before the regular Bench?., the Registrar (Judicial) is directed to submit an explanation of the concerned employee in this regard, in Chamber. However, the Registrar (Judicial) is directed to comply with our earlier order dated 13.12.2010. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.Vimla Jain) Judge Judge C....
Managing Committee Waqf Masjid Vs. M.P. Waqf Board
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
W.P.No.10130/2012 (Managing Committee Waqf Masjid versus MP Waqf Board and otheRs.18.07.2012 Heard Shri Mrigendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 26.06.2012 allegedly passed by the Chairman of the Waqf Board on the ground that the order is without competence or sanction of law. Admittedly, the petitioner has an alternative efficacious statutory remedy of approaching the Waqf Tribunal under the provisions of Waqf Act for mitigation of his grievance and therefore, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the Waqf Tribunal for mitigation of his grievance. It is however, directed that in case the petitioner approaches the Tribunal within ten days along with a copy of the order passed today and a copy of the petition, as well as an application seeking interim relief, the Waqf Tribunal shall take up the matter a...
Sheshrao Koshe Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
1 W.P.No.7217/2012 18.7.2012 Shri Sunil Verma, Counsel for petitioner. Shri Vijay Pandey, Dy.AG for respondents No.1 to 6. Shri Abhishek Rajan, SDO(P).Sarni is also present in Court. It was submitted by him that there was some information in respect of whereabouts of Ku.Poonam Koshe in Bihar and the police party was sent to Bihar to trace out her, but she could not be traced out. It is submitted that today, the State is filing report in this regard, but we are not satisfied with the efforts made by the police. However, further four weeks time is allowed to the respondents to produce the corpus of Ku.Poonam Koshe before this Court. Shri Vijay Pandey, learned counsel appearing for State also informs that earlier on 4.7.2012, the Inspector General of Police, Hoshangabad was directed to file his affidavit in respect of efforts made by the respondents to trace out Ku.Poonam Koshe, but he has been transferred and no incumbent has joined at Hoshangabad. However, it is submitted that within a ...
Santosh Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
1 Criminal Appeal Noi.2150/2003 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.2150/2003 Santosh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Gupta. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name of counsel for the parties: Shri Ashok Chakraverti, counsel for the appellant. Shri G.S. Thakur, Panel Lawyer the respondent/State. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (Passed on 18th day of July, 2012) The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 3.12.2003 in S.T. No.178/2002 passed by the 1 st Additional Sessions Judge Raisen, whereby the appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 324 of IPC and sentenced for two years R.I. with fine of `500/-. In default of payment of fine, he was to...
Suresh Kumar Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jul-18-2012
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, PRINCIPAL SEAT, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH PRESENT: HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI N. K. GUPTA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1765/1997 Suresh Kumar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh ........................................................................................................... For the appellant : Shri Mukesh Pandey, Advocate. For the respondent : Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer. ........................................................................................................... JUDGMENT (Delivered on the 18th day of July, 2012) The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 21.8.1997, passed by the Special Judge under SC/ ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in Special Case No.26/97 whereby the appellant was convicted for offence punishable under Sections 448, 354 of I.P.C and Section 3(1)(xi) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter it would be mentioned as the Special Act.) and sentenced for three months rigorous imprisonment with fine...
- ‹ Prev
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- Next ›
- Last »