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.
Rekha Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-07-2012
7.8.2012 Shri Brijesh Choubey, Advocate for the applicants. Shri Prakash Gupta, PL for the State. Heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This is the fiRs.bail application filed by the applicants under section 438 of Cr.P.C.for grant of anticipatory bail. The applicants apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No.255/2012 registered at P.S.Hatta, District Damoh for the offence punishable under Sections 294, 324, 506-B and 452/34 of the IPC. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. A counter case has also been registered against complainant Mohanlal Sharma vide Crime No.256/12 under sections 341, 323, 294, 506, 34 of the IPC. The main incident of making assault by Co.accused Nandu Sharma on complainant Mohanlal took place out of the house, thereafter, false and concocted story in respect to entering the house was made. Applicant Rekha is a lady. Nothing has been alleged against Rekha in...
Akhilesh Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
6.8.2012 Shri D.P.Patel, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Akhilendra Singh, GA for the State. This is the fiRs.bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of bail. The applicant is in custody since 15.6.2012 in connection with Crime No.238/2012 registered at P.S.Amarpatan, District Satna for the offence punishable under sections 498-A/34 of the IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Its a matrimonial matter, if the applicant remains in jail for a long time, chances of compromise between the parties, if any, will be diminished. The applicant is in custody and trial would take considerable time to conclude, therefore, he be released on bail. Learned counsel for State has opposed the application. On due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case to release the applicant on bail, therefore, without c...
Kamal Narayan Vs. Kripa Shankar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
M.Cr.C.No.8805/12 06.08.2012. Shri Ramesh Tamrakar, learned counsel for petitioneRs.Shri A.Namdeo, learned PL for respondent no.2/State. Heard on the point of admission. Issue notice to respondent no.1 to show cause against admission by both modes, i.e., ordinary as well as by RAD post. PF be paid within three clear working days by RAD post as well as by Ordinary Mode. Notice is made returnable within four weeks. Also heard on IA No.15195/2012, an application for stay. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the alleged allegation about defamation took place at Chowrai, District-Chhindwara for which offence could be tried in District-Chhindwara and not at Bhopal, and Bhopal Court has wrongly taken the cognizance and RT No.6853/09 has been registered which is pending in the 2 Court of JMFC, Bhopal (Presided Over by Smt. Shashi Singh).Counsel submits that if the stay is not granted, then this petition will become futile. Looking to the circumstances of the case, it is directed that t...
Kirat Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
Cr.R.No.1159/09 06.08.2012 Shri B.R.Koshta, Adv.for applicant. Shri Samir Chile, Govt. Adv.for respondent No.1/State. Shri Laxminarayan Sahu, Adv.for respondents No.2 to 5, 10 and 11. Heard on I.A.No.9866/12 an application for changing the counsel for applicant. Learned counsel for applicant Shri B.R.Koshta submits that he has been engaged by applicant . He further submits that as party tried his best to get no objection certificate from earlier engaged counsel Shri S.A.Wakeel, Advocate but he did not get it. Today his earlier engaged counsel did not personally present in the Court. Looking to the above submission I.A.No.9866/12 is allowed. Shri B.R.Koshta is directed to appear on behalf of applicant in this case. Learned counsel for the applicant wants time to file Vakalatnama List on 23.8.2012 . (M.A.SIDDIQUI) JUDGE Ag/...
Smt. A. Thakkar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
Smt.A.Thakkar versus State of MP and others W.P.No.11915/2012 06/08/2012 Shri Paritosh Trivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Sharma, learned PL for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 on advance notice. In this writ petition, the petitioner who is Auxiliary Nurse Midwife has challenged the validity of the order dated 13.7.2012 by which she has been transferred to Sub Health Centre Paraswada. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by order dated 14.6.2010, the petitioner was transferred from Sub Health Centre Mohgaon (dha) to Sub Health Centre Kanki (Lalbarra). The Respondent No.4, by an order dated 15.6.2010 was also transferred to Kanki, however, her salary was being drawn from Paraswada, as she was in excess. However, by the impugned order dated 13.7.2012, the petitioner has been transferred to Sub Health Centre, Paraswada in the garb of rationalization wh...
Premlal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
M.Cr.C.No.6303/2012 06.08.2012 Shri Amit Upadhyay, counsel for the applicant. Shri Akhilendra Kumar Singh, GA for the respondent/State. Heard. The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.87/2012 registered at P.S.Sahpur, Dindori for the offence punishable under Sections 376, 511 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in custody since 15.4.2012. He has been falsely implicated in this case. As per MLC report no injury was found on the person of the prosecutrix. Charge 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 with facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant. His application is allowed. It is di...
Munnalal Vs. Aam Janta
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
W.P.No.11348/2012 06.08.2012 Shri Praveen Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide order dated 27.2.2012 although the Succession Certificate has been directed to be issued to the petitioner but it has been directed that on submitting a solvent surety of Rs.18 lacs, the Succession Certificate would be issued to the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that he would like to withdraw the petition and would like to assail the aforesaid order dated 27.2.2012 passed by learned FiRs.Civil Judge, Class I, District Jabalpur in Succession Case No.26/2009 by filing an appeal to set aside that order. This contention is accepted and this petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to raise this objection before the Appellate Authority that such a condition cannot be imposed. With the aforesaid observations, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as prayed. Let certified copy of the impugned order dated 27.2.2012 be returned to learned counsel for the petitio...
Prithvipal Singh Parhar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
W.P.No.10866/2012 (Prithvipal Singh versus State of M.P.& Ors.) 06.08.2012 Shri A.A.Awasthi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S.Bisen, learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State on advance copy. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. Though the petitioner has raised several issues, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petition filed by him be disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondent authorities under the provisions of M.P.Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam for the purpose of seeking release of the land included in a scheme notified under Section 50 of the Adhiniyam or for permitting him to undertake activities to develop his land on his own or in the alternative for a direction to the authorities to purchase the same and pay the value of the land to the petitioner at the market value. The learned Govt. Advocate for the respondent/State submits that in case the petitioner does so by filing a represe...
Balkishan Vs. Ravaraman
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
W.P.No.9450/2008 06.08.2012 Shri Sanjay Patel, Advocate for the petitioner/plaintiff. Shri Ashutosh Tiwari, Advocate for the respondent no.1/defendant no.1. Smt. Divya Kirti Bohre, Panel Lawyer for respondent no2/State. They are heard. By this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the impugned order dated 10.3.2008 (annexure P/5) by which the amendment application of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground of delay. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that although the suit is pending since 1996 but on 18.4.2008 he filed an application to amend the plaint making a prayer for delivery of possession of the suit property from which he has been dispossessed in the month of May, 1996. This application was opposed by the fiRs.defendant/respondent no.1. Learned Trial Court rejected the application on the ground that the amendment would become time barred. Hence, this petition has been filed. I have hea...
Talchand Chouhan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-06-2012
Talchand Chouhan. versus State of MP and others W.P.No.11889/2012 06/08/2012 Shri Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Sharma, learned PL for the respondents. In this writ petition, the petitioner who is a Daily Wages Employee has challenged the validity of the order dated 10.7.2012 by which he has been transferred from Balaghat to Katangi. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court reported in 2010 (2) MPLJ 662 the services of a Daily Wages Employee are not transferable. The aforesaid preposition of law is not disputed by learned counsel for the parties. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and in view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Ashok Tiwari versus M.P.Text Book Corporation and another 2010 (2) MPLJ 662 the impugned order of transfer dated 10.7.2012 in so far as it pertains to the petitioner is hereby quashed. The writ pe...
- ‹ Prev
- 123
- 124
- 125
- 126
- 127
- 129
- 130
- 131
- 132
- 133
- Next ›
- Last »