Madhya Pradesh Court August 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.
Chandrabhan Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-2012
1 Criminal Appeal No.1453/2012 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.1453/2012 Chandrabhan Singh and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Gupta. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name of counsel for the parties: Shri R.S. Patel, counsel for the appellants. Shri G.S. Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT (Delivered on 7th day of September 2012) The appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 29.6.2012 passed by the 2 nd Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar in S.T. No.656/2010, whereby the appellants were convicted and sentenced for the offences as under:- Section Act Sentence Fine amount Sentence in default of payment of fine 326/34 I.P.C. Five years' R.I. `1,000/- Three months...
Smt. Saroj Vs. Mithailal
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-2012
W.P.No.12290/2012 07.08.2012 Shri Jaideep Sirpurkar, Advocate for petitioneRs.Heard on the question of admission. Issue show cause notice to the respondent on payment of process fee within three working days. Service be made by registered AD post as well as ordinary mode. Also heard on I.A.No.10055/2012, which is an application for grant of interim relief. Issue notice of this application to the respondent on payment of process fee within three working days. Service be made by registered AD post as well as ordinary mode. Till further ordeRs.further proceedings of Civil Suit No.3-A/2011 pending in the Court of Additional Judge to the Court of FiRs.Additional District Judge, Chhindwara shall remain stayed. List in the week commencing 10.09.2012. Certified copy as per rules. (A.K.Shrivastava) JUDGE. SS...
Smt. Reeta Singh Vs. Indian Oil Corporation, Indane Area Office
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-2012
W.P.No.12692/2012 07.08.2012 Shri Rajesh Dubey, Advocate for petitioner. On the request of this Court, Shri Aditya Adhikari, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent. They are heard. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking the following reliefs:- (i) May kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus to respondent to reconsider the case of petitioner in view of the revised guideline of the respondent under clause 17, considering the representations of the petitioner P/9, P/10 and P/11. (ii) May kindly be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari for quashment of impugned order dated 02.07.2012 (P/1).(iii) Grant any other relief as deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of this case, alongwith the cost of this writ petition be also awarded. By challenging the impugned order (Annexure-P/1) passed by the respondent it has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that before cancelling the candidature of petitioner for al...
Mohd. Ayub Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-2012
M.Cr.C.No.6366/2012 7.8.2012 Shri B.K.Shrivastava, counsel for the applicant. Shri A.K.Chaurasiya, GA for the respondent/State. Heard. The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.86/2012 registered at P.S.Jaitpur, Shahdol for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366(K).376 and 506 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in custody since 18.4.2012. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Prosecutrix Ranu @ Urmila is more than 16 years of age. She had gone with the applicant on her own accord. She lived with the applicant for about two months. When she returned back to her parental house, she lodged a false and concocted report against the applicant. Charge sheet has already been filed and trial would take considerable time to conclude finally, therefore, he prays for grant of bail to applicant. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer. On due consideration of the contentions raised by the counsel for the parties along wi...
Lilawati Vs. Devmati
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-2012
W.P.No.8358/2012 07.08.2012 Shri A.P.Shah, Advocate for the petitioner. None for plaintiffs/respondents no.1 to 4. None for defendant/respondent no.5 Shri Rohini Prasad Tiwari, Govt. Advocate for respondent no.6/State of M.P.They are heard. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner/defendant no.1 is challenging the validity of the impugned order dated 14.5.2012 passed by Additional District Judge, Baidhan, District Singrouli in Misc. Civil Appeal No.39/2011 by which the order dated 17.8.2011 passed by learned Second Civil Judge, Class II, Singrauli in Civil Suit No.110-A/2011 by which the application for issuance of temporary injunction of plaintiffs has been rejected, has been reversed and set aside. No exhaustive statements of fact are required to be narrated for the purpose of this petition. Suffice is to say that a suit for declaration and injunction and in the alternative for possession has been filed by the plaintiffs with an averment that th...
Smt. Kiran Bala Sharma Vs. the State of M.P. and ors.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-2012
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR Writ Petition No :1773. OF 2003(S) Smt.Kiran Bala Sharma - V/s - State of Madhya Pradesh and others Present : Honble Shri Justice Rajendra Menon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri P.N.Pathak, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri B.P.Pandey, learned Deputy Govt. Advocate, for respondent nos. 1 and 4. Shri D.K.Dixit, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2, 5 and 6. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (07-08-2012) 1. Challenging order dated 12-04-2003 (Annexure P-9) removing the petitioner from service, this writ petition has been filed.2. It is the case of the petitioner that she was appointed as a Head Mistress in Sanatan Dharam Middle School Gorakhpur, Jabalpur. Even though she was appointed as Head Mistress on 20-07-1980 but the pay scale and other benefits accruing on such appointment was not paid to her instead she was tre...
Brajendra Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-2012
M.Cr.C. No. 8605/2012 7.8.2012 Shri P.S. Gaharwar, counsel for the applicant. Shri Chandrakant Mishra, G.A. for the State. Heard finally. This is an application under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Crime No.479/2012 registered at Police Station Waidhan for offence punishable under Sections 294, 323, 506, 327, 34 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no criminal past. Except an offence under Section 327 of IPC, all other offences are bailable and are triable by Judicial Magistrate First Class. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is a reputed citizen of the locality and in the event of arrest, his reputation would be tarnished, therefore he prays for grant of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer. Considering over all facts and ci...
Sikandar Hafiz Alias Nawab Mia Vs. Anwar Mohammad Khan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-2012
W.P.No.12588/2012 07.08.2012 Shri Naman Nagrath, Senior Advocate with Shri Swapnil Sohgaura, Advocate for petitioner. Heard on the question of admission. Issue show cause notice to the respondent No.1 on payment of process fee within three working days. Service be made by registered AD post as well as ordinary mode and also by Dasti service. Also heard on I.A.No.10197/2012, which is an application for grant of interim relief. Issue notice of this application to the respondent No.1 on payment of process fee within three working days. Service be made by registered AD post as well as ordinary mode. Till further ordeRs.further proceedings of Civil Suit No.279-A/2010 pending in the Court of V Civil Judge, Class-2, Bhopal shall remain stayed. List in the week commencing 17.09.2012. Certified copy as per rules. (A.K.Shrivastava) JUDGE. SS...
Radhey Shyam Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-2012
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR Criminal Revision No.242/2002 Radhey Shyam PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Madhya Pradesh RESPONDENT PRESENT: HONBLE SHRI M.A. SIDDIQUI, J.Shri A.D.Mishra, Advocate for petitioner. Shri Sameer Chile, Govt. Advocate for respondent /State. ORDER RESERVED ON 31.07.2012 ORDER PASSED ON 07.08.2012 ORDER This criminal revision has been preferred by petitioner Radhey Shyam under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure feeling aggrieved by the judgment dated 28.6.99 passed by JMFC,Chhindwara in Criminal Case No.2268/96 whereby the petitioner has been convicted under Section 393 IPC and sentenced to R.I. for two years and fine of Rs.200/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo further R.I.for one month. In Criminal Appeal No.61/99, learned Ist ASJ.Chhindwara by judgment dated 18.2.2002 has confirmed the aforesaid judgment of conviction and sentence passed by JMFC, Chhindwara. -2- 2. The prosecution case, in brief is that on 15.10.84 at about 6...
Narayan Das Shukla and ors. Vs. Water Users Association,singhpur and o ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-2012
W.P.No.3874 / 2002 (Narayan Das Shukla & others ..Vs..Water Users Association, Singhpur, District Shahdol & another) 07-08-2012 Shri Brijesh Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.None for the respondents. The petitioners have filed this petition being aggrieved by the order 13-5-2002 passed by the Water Users Association, Singhpur, District Shahdol, whereby the petitioneRs.request to permit them to draw water from the canal in question has been rejected on various grounds. From a perusal of the provisions of Section 27 of the Madhya Pradesh Sinchai Prabandhan Me Krishkon Ki Bhagidari Adhiniyam, 1999 it is apparent that the order passed by the Water Users Association is appealable before the Managing Committee of the Distributory Committee. As the issue involved in the petition requires to be adjudicated by the authorities having knowledge of the area in question and also requires adjudication of the disputed question of fact, therefore, the petition filed by the petitioners is di...
- ‹ Prev
- 119
- 120
- 121
- 122
- 123
- 125
- 126
- 127
- 128
- 129
- Next ›
- Last »