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.
Krishana Dutt Diwedi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2012
W.P.No.13902 / 2012 (Krishnadatt Dwivedi ..Vs...State of M.P.& otheRs.29-08-2012 Shri R.K.Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.K.Shrivastava, learned panel lawyer, for the State/respondents. Heard on the question of admission and interim relief. The petitioner has filed this petition alleging inaction on the part of the police authorities stating that while they have not taken any action on the complaint filed by the petitioner. The police have registered a FiRs.Information Report against the petitioner on the complaint made by the Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Shahdol. It is, therefore, prayed that the respondent/authorities be directed to look into the complaint filed by the petitioner. In view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2, Superintendent of Police, Shahdol, to look into the complaint filed by the petitioner and deal with the same expeditiously in accordance with law. It is made ...
Yogendra Pratap Signh Vs. V.D.Tripathi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2012
Criminal Revision No.294/2009 29/08/2012 Shri G.S.Ahluwaliya, Advocate for the applicants. Shri A.K.Pathak with Shri Yashwardhan Vaidya, Advocates for respondent No.1 and 2. Shri Pushpraj Singh, P.L.for the State. Heard. Applicants have filed this revision petition being aggrieved by order dated 17/12/2008 passed by Sessions Judge, Satna in Cr.R.No.9/08 arising out of order dated 31/08/05 passed by JMFC, Maihar in criminal case No.1326/02 whereby the revisional Court has set aside the order passed by trial Court. Facts in short giving rise to this petition are that applicants were facing trial under sections 39, 192 and 177 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the JMFC. During trial ADPO filed an application u/s 321 of Cr.P.C to withdraw from the prosecution. The same was allowed by JMFC, Maihar and applicants were acquitted to the aforesaid offences. Respondents assailed the aforesaid order before Sessions Judge. Learned Sessions Judge allowed the revision petition and thereby set aside t...
Mukesh Yadav Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2012
M.Cr.C.No.10079/2012 29/08/2012 Shri Aditya Sharma, Advocate for the applicants. Shri Pushpraj Singh, Panel Lawyer for the State. Heard. Applicants invoked the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court u/s 482 of Cr.P.C being aggrieved by order dated 8/08/2012 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad in Cr.R.No.52/12 whereby he dismissed the revision petition and affirmed the order dated 2/05/12 passed by JMFC, Hoshangabad in criminal case No.466/07 in which he allowed the application of prosecution filed u/s 311 of Cr.P.C.Facts in short giving rise to this petition are that applicants are facing the trial before JMFC under sections 467 and 471 of IPC. Trial Magistrate closed the prosecution evidence on 21/12/2011 thereafter, recorded the evidence on behalf of defence and listed the case for final hearing. On the date of final hearing, prosecution moved an application u/s 311 of Cr.P.C to call two witnesses one is A.K.Poranik (Handwriting Expert) and another is S.K.Shukla (Inve...
Deilkhush Walde Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2012
Dilkhush Walde versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No.13594 29. 8.2012: Shri Jay Singh Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Lalit Joglekar, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. Petitioner is working as daily wages employee in the Department of Veterinary Services and claims regularization in service on the ground that he has completed more than 20 years of service. He is working regularly since 1992 and is entitled to regularization in the light of principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka versus Uma Devi, 2006(4) SCC, 1, and the policies formulated by the State Government on 16/05/2007 and further on 06/09/08, claiming regularization, petitioner has filed this writ petition. Keeping in view the aforesaid contentions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, respondents are directed to examine the case of petitioner for regularization in accordance to policies and circulars of the State Government and pass appropriate or...
Rajpal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2012
Cr. Appeal No.2808/11 29.8.2012 Shri J.K.Verma, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Vivek Sharma, learned P.L.for the State. Shri Anurag Shivhare, learned counsel for the Objector-Raman (Victim).Heard on I.A.No.15630/12, a repeat application on behalf of appellant for suspension of his remaining jail sentence and grant of bail, as his earlier application in this regard was dismissed for want of prosecution but by making some observations on merits vide order dated 24.2.2012. Appellant has been convicted under Section 394/397 of I.P.C.for R.I.10 years with fine of Rs.5000/- with stipulation of further imprisonment in default of depositing the fine. As per record, since the date of his arrest i.e.26.2.2011, he was remained in judicial custody till passing the impugned judgment on 12.8.2011, and since then he is facing the awarded jail sentence. In such premises, he has suffered near about one and half year out of the awarded jail sentence. Appellants counsel by referring the FiRs.Inf...
Ramesh Prasad Dwivedi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2012
CONC 95...
Nishi Tiwari Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2012
S.A.No.108/2011 29.08.2012 Shri Kapil Jain, Advocate for the appellant. Smt. Pratibha Mishra, Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State. Heard on I.A.No.1485/2011, which is an application seeking condonation of delay. Considering the reasons so stated in the application for condonation of two days in filing the appeal, it is allowed. Delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. Also heard on the question of admission. The appeal is admitted for final hearing on the following substantial questions of law :- (1) Whether the Courts below committed error in dismissing the suit filed by the plaintiff seeking declaration because original owner Ghasia was recorded as gair haqdar tenant or having the possession on the land in question which do not confer any right and title to him ignoring the provisions contained under section 158 (1) (d) (ii) M.P.Land Revenue Code, 1959 whereby the gair haqdar tenants conferred with the Bhumiswami right after commencement of the Code, however, the finding so r...
Smt. Alka Mishra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2012
29.8.2012 W.P.No.2072/2011 Shri Pushpendra Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Sanjay Dwivedi, learned Government Advocate for the respondent/State. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. In this petition, the petitioners inter-alia pray for a direction to the respondents to regularize their services from the date of their initial appointment, as has been done in the case of one Satish Kumar Mandloi and Rajesh Dubey. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners services have been regularized from the date of the order. However, in the case of aforesaid employees namely Satish Kumar Mandloi and Rajesh Dubey, the order of regularization has been passed from their initial date of appointment. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that being aggrieved by the action of the respondents in according the benefit of regularization to the petitioners from the date of order, the petitioners have fi...
Smt. Rekha Dubey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2012
29.8.2012 W.P.No.4343/2009 (s) Shri Mahendra Pateriya, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri A.K.Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is finally heard. In this petition, the petitioner inter-alia prays for a direction to the respondents to award her 20 marks for Diploma in Teaching Examination for the post of Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondents initially granted 20 marks, however, later on the same was withdrawn, being aggrieved by the action of the respondents, the petitioner has submitted representation dated 18.2.2009 Annexure P/20 which is pending adjudication. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the writ petition be disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to decide the representation submitted by the petitioner. On the other hand learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents states that the representation shall be ...
Suresh Meshram Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2012
Suresh Meshram versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No.13597 29. 8.2012: Shri Jay Singh Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Lalit Joglekar, learned Panel Lawyer for the State. Petitioner is working as daily wages employee in the Department of Veterinary Services and claims regularization in service on the ground that he has completed more than 20 years of service. He is working regularly since 1992 and is entitled to regularization in the light of principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka versus Uma Devi, 2006(4) SCC, 1, and the policies formulated by the State Government on 16/05/2007 and further on 06/09/08, claiming regularization, petitioner has filed this writ petition. Keeping in view the aforesaid contentions advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, respondents are directed to examine the case of petitioner for regularization in accordance to policies and circulars of the State Government and pass appropriate or...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »