Madhya Pradesh Court January 2013 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.
Padma Bai Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
Criminal Revision No.30/2013 28.01.2013 Shri Basant Pandey, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the Respondent-State. Heard on admission. By this criminal revision the applicant has challenged the order dated 3.12.2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge to the Court of the FiRs.Additional Sessions Judge, Balaghat in ST No.6/2012. The brief facts of the case relating to the present revision are that a trial is going on against the applicant for the offence under Sections 363 and 366-A of IPC. The prosecutrix and her mother have submitted a compromise application before the trial Court, which was disallowed. Thereafter an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C.was moved to call the prosecutrix and her mother for their re- examination. After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that the applicant has moved an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C.in li...
Shankar Singh Rawat Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
1 W.P.No.1302/2013(S) 28.1.2013 Shri A.K.Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri A.K.Sharma, learned Govt. Advocate for respondents on advance notice. Petitioner Daily Wager (Cook) employed in Government Aadiwasi Boys Hostel, Dhulkoat since 12.07.1991 vide this writ petition seeks direction to the respondents to grant him regular pay scale in the light of circular dated 17.3.1978. It is urged that on the basis of aforesaid circular daily wage employee engaged in Tribal Welfare Department has been extended the benefit vide order passed in W.A.No.85/2011 (Dhanubai V. State of M.P and otheRs.decided on 27.8.2011 by Division Bench of this Court at Indore. It is contended that respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of decision rendered in Dhannubai (supra).Learned Govt. Advocate appearing for respondents have no objection if direction is given to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner as per decision rendered by Division Bench ...
Sourabh Kumar Gupta Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
Sourabh Kumar Gupta versus State of M.P.& ORS.Writ Petition No.1197 28. 1.2013: Shri Swapnil Ganguly, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.S.Bisen, learned Government Advocate for the State. As the representation of the petitioner in the matter of allocation of land is pending before the State, as is evident from Annexure P-5 and the documents enclosed therewith available at page 24 & 25 of the paper-book, for the present, without entering into controveRs.on merits, respondent No.1 is directed to examine the representation of petitioner and decide it in accordance to law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. With the aforesaid the petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. (Rajendra Menon) Judge ss/-...
Dulichand Bhansre Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
1 W.P.No.1304/2013(S) 28.1.2013 Shri A.K.Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri A.K.Sharma, learned Govt. Advocate for respondents on advance notice. Petitioner Daily Wager (Waterman) employed in Government Adiwasi Girls Hostel Davatiya Burhanpur since 4.10.1990 vide this writ petition seeks direction to the respondents to grant him regular pay scale in the light of circular dated 17.3.1978. It is urged that on the basis of aforesaid circular daily wage employee engaged in Tribal Welfare Department has been extended the benefit vide order passed in W.A.No.85/2011 (Dhanubai V. State of M.P and otheRs.decided on 27.8.2011 by Division Bench of this Court at Indore. It is contended that respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of decision rendered in Dhannubai (supra).Learned Govt. Advocate appearing for respondents have no objection if direction is given to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner as per decision rendered by Div...
Smt. Kamla Parashar Vs. Chief Municipal Officer
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
1 Writ Petition No. 11742/2009 28.1.2013 Shri Mukesh Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Devendra Gangrade, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri A.K. Sharma, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent Nos. 3 and 4. Heard. Petitioner, retired Teacher having retired w.e.f 30.6.2012 from Balak Mandir School, under Municipal Council Junnardeo has filed this petition for redressal of her grievance that her pension has No. been revised under fifth pay commission. Earlier petitioner approached this Court vide Writ Petition No. 16049/2007 for settlement of retiral dues. The petition was disposed of on 5.12.2007 with direction to the respondents to implement the resolution dated 24.9.2001. It is contended that the pension has No. been revised in accordance therewith. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 have filed their return; wherein paragraph 4, it is stated: 4. Tha...
Gandhi @ Vijay Pal Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
1 M.Cr.C.No.2732/2010 28/1/2013 Shri Brijesh Mishra, counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Nirmala Nayak, Government Advocate for the respondent / State. This petition has been preferred under Section 482 of Cr.P.C against the order 24.12.2009 passed by the FiRs.Additional District Judge, Shahdol in Criminal Revision No.198/2008, affirming the order dated 26.10.2009 passed by CJM, Shahdol declining the Supardnama of seized Eucalyptus tree wood According to the petitioner wood of Eucalyptus plants grown on the land by him bearing survey No.100/1 ad measuring 1.43 acre land, was being carried in a truck from Shahdol to Nepamill, was apprehended by police. Having suspicion that the aforesaid wood was unlawfully obtained by the petitioner from the Government land Police Shahdol seized exercised power under Section 102 of Cr.P.C.These Eucalyptus plants prima facie found to have been raised on land bearing KhaSr.No.95, 96, 100/2, 101/1,101/2 and 101/3 entered as Government land in Revenue PapeRs....
The State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Sanjay Kewat
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
W.P.No.18948/2012 28.1.2013: Shri S.S.Bisen, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri A.P.Singh, learned counsel for the respondents. Challenging the order Annexure P/1 dated 7.5.2012 passed by the FiRs.Additional Sessions Judge, Rewa allowing a revision filed by respondent Sanjay Kewat and quashing the orders of confiscation passed by the competent authority of the State Government and the appellate authority under the provisions of Section 52 of the Indian Forest Act, this writ petition has been filed by the department. Respondent Shri Sanjay Kewat is owner of a tractor and trolley bearing not MP 53AA 015.and MP53 AA 0160. the tractor and trolley was seized by the forest authorities when 27 pieces of wood measuring 1.070 Cu. Mtr. were seized. When the vehicle was seized it was being driven by Driver Pappu Kol and one Rajbhan Kushwaha who claims to be the owner of wood in question was traveling in the vehicle. Vehicle was seized and confiscation having been ordered by the competent au...
Pradeep JaIn Vs. Ashok Jain
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
W.P.No.20364/2012 28.1.2013: Shri Rakesh Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Manish Gavne, learned counsel for the respondents. Challenging the order Annexure P/8 dated 31.10.2012 passed by 6th Civil Judge, Class II, Chhindwara, withdrawing the order earlier passed directing the Revenue Inspector to submit a demarcation report and directing the petitioner to take steps for submitting the demarcation report, this writ petition has been filed. Plaintiff- respondent has filed the suit for declaration and injunction. Matter pertains to a dispute between the parties with regard to drain situated in the house of plaintiff and certain matters with regard to passage of watter to the said drain. To resolve the controveRs.in the matter and to get the report of demarcation, learned Court below vide Annexure P/5 on 20th March, 2012 exercised its powers under Order 26 Rule 9 CPC and appointed a Revenue Inspector to conduct demarcation and submit a report. Papers were forwarded to the Rev...
Krishankant Mishra Vs. Smt. Vandna Mishra
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
1 M.Cr.C.No.354/2013 28/1/2013 Shri Rakesh Sagar, counsel for the petitioner. This petition has been preferred under Section 482 of Cr.P.C against the order dated 5.12.2012 passed by the Presiding Officer, 4th A.S.J.Satna in Criminal Revision No.149/12 affirming the order dated 16.12.2011 of JMFC declining further adjournment for pleading the evidence in the case of maintenance. Without entering into the merit of the case, on the basis of assurance given by the learned counsel for the petitioner, he undertakes to keep his witnesses present in the Court on date so fixed, this petition is disposed of with the following directions:1. petitioner / husband shall keep his witnesses present in the trial Court on 22nd February, 2013 along with copy of this order in the trial Court on which date case is said to have been fixed for arguments, the trial Court shall record the statement of witnesses kept present by the petitioner in Court and then proceed further to decide the case 2 M.Cr.C.No.35...
Rishi Patva Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Jan-28-2013
CRR.No.2251/2012 Criminal Revision No.2251/2012 28.1.2013 Shri Amit Kumar Sahu, counsel for the applicant. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. Heard on admission. The applicant has preferred this revision against the order dated 6.9.2012 passed by the learned Fifth Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in S.T.No.436/2012, whereby the charges of offence punishable under sections 294, 324, 307 of IPC were framed against the applicant. The prosecution's case, in short, is that, a quarrel took place between the applicant and the victim Nilesh Vishwakarma and therefore the applicant assaulted the victim Nilesh Vishwakarma by a knife. In the meantime, one Raj also intervened and therefore, he sustained injury in his abdomen. After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that there is no charge framed for the injuries caused to the victim Raj and therefore, depth of the inju...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »