Madhya Pradesh Court October 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.
Manoj Sahu Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR Criminal Appeal No.2605/2005 Appellants:1. Manoj Sahu, s/o Leeladhar Sahu aged- 26 years residing near Shankar Mandir, Suraj Ganj Itarsi, District Hoshangabad 2. Shanti Bai w/o Leeladhar Sahu aged- 55 years residing near Shankar Mandir, Suraj Ganj Itarsi, District Hoshangabad 3. Vijaya @ Vijaylata, w/o Ramesh Kumar Sahu aged- 36 years resident of A-type, 402, New Colony, S.P.N., District Hoshangabad Vs. Respondents: State of M.P. For the appellants : Shri Surendra Singh, Senior Advocate with Shri Shivam Singh, Advocate For the respondent: Shri S.K. Kashyap, Government Advocate For the Objector : Shri A.K.Tiwari, Advocate ****** Present: HON. SHRI JUSTICE B. D. RATHI ****** JUDGMENT (8.10.13) Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 9.12.2005 passed by the I Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad in S.T. No.322/2001, the appellants have preferred this appeal under Section 374(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code ('Code' for short) whereby they have bee...
Sita Kumari Vs. Manik Chandra Sahu
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-2013
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADHYA PRADESH, JABAPLUR Single Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.K.Gupta,J.M.Cr.C. No.11923 of 2007 Sita Kumari & others. Vs. Manik Chandra Sahu. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri B.K.Bais, Advocate for the applicants. Shri P.K.Saxena, Advocate for the respondent. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on the 8th day of October, 2013) By way of this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. the applicants have challenged the order dated 23.3.2007 passed in Criminal Revision No.214/2005 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Waidhan District Sidhi and also the order dated 17.10.2005 passed in Criminal Case No.481/2004 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Waidhan whereby the maintenance directed against the applicants was set aside.2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicants were given a maintenance of Rs.800/-, Rs.500/...
iffco-tokio General Insurnce Co. Vs. Adarsh Patel
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-2013
1 W.P.No.15767/2013. 8.10.2013. Shri Aditya Narayan Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 3.8.2013 passed by 8th M.A.C.T.Jabalpur in claim Case No.416/12, whereby the preliminary objection of the petitioner/ insurer regarding entertainability of the claim petition filed by the respondent No.1 to 4 has been dismissed on the basis of the decision of this court in the matter of Munda Tai & Ors versus New India Insurance Company Ltd reported in (2013) 1 ACC298 The petitioner's counsel after taking me through the papers placed on record along with the impugned order by referring the unreported order of this Court vide dated 5.10.2012 passed in R.P.No.766/12 argued that the impugned order has been passed on the basis of above mentioned cited case but such reported order has been recalled by this Court by the aforesaid order dated 5...
Annmma Mathai Vs. Secretary the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-2013
WRIT PETITION No.14510/2010 08/10/2013 Shri Vivek Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Santosh Yadav, learned counsel for the respondents/State. By filing I.A.No.11640/2013, an application for final disposal at motion stage, it is contended by the petitioner that the similar issue has been decided by this Court in W.P.No.3355/2012 (s) by the Gwalior Bench in case of Smt. Radha Soni versus State of M.P.and another, vide order dated 11.10.2012. Relying on the said decision the Gwalior Bench of this Court has disposed of Writ Petition No.2724/2010 on 15.07.2013. It is contended that the claim of the petitioner is identical and in terms of the specific amendment made in the Act, the age of superannuation of persons like petitioner would be 65 yeaRs.It is contended by respondents in their return that the age of superannuation of nursing employees is extended from 60 to 65 years after making Cabinet decision vide order dated 31.10.2009, and since the petitioner was already extend...
QamruddIn Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR Criminal Revision No.1766/2013 Petitioner : Qamruddin S/o Late Nanhe Khan Vs. Respondent : The State of Madhya Pradesh Present: Hon. Shri B.D.Rathi ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For petitioner : Shri A.Usmani, Advocate For the respondent : Shri Yogesh Dhande, Govt. Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (9/10/13) This revision petition has been preferred against the judgment dated 12/8/2013 passed by I Additional Sessions Judge, Burhanpur in Cr.A. No.60/13 whereby the judgment dated 28/02/2013 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Burhanpur, in Criminal Case No.1730/12 convicting the petitioner under Section 6(b) read with 10 of the M.P. Krishik Pashu Parirakshan Adhiniyam, 1959 (for short the Adhiniyam.) and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, convicting him under...
Lalji Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-2013
M.Cr.C.No.11665/2013 08.10.2013 Shri Sanjay Singh, counsel for the applicant. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the State. At the request of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. The applicant has moved the present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.against the order dated 30.7.2013 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sidhi in Forest Crime No.471/16, whereby the same was dismissed. The facts of the case, in short are that, a vehicle No.MP53GA2352was found plying in the reserve forest of Soan Ghadiyal while transferring some sand therefore, it was seized relating to Sections 27, 29, 39 and 51 of the Wild Life Protection Act. 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 though the vehicle was seized for a crime, but according to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of M.P.and ORS.versus Madhukar Rao [AIR2008SC (supp...
Prabhakar Tikaria Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-2013
W.P.No.10188/2013 08.10.2013 Shri Akash Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, learned Govt. Advocate for respondents- State. Shri Yogesh Dhande, learned counsel for the respondent No.4. Heard on I.A.No.9274/2013 an application for vacating interim stay dated 18.6.2013. By filing this writ petition, the petitioner has called in question the order dated 14.3.2013, by which the petitioner has been repatriated back to his parent department contending inter alia that the petitioner, who was working as Sub Engineer in the Fisheries Department of Government of Madhya Pradesh, had taken part in a process of selection for deputation posting under the M.P.State Employment Guarantee Council. Such a selection was done by the agency constituted by the said Council and the posting order was issued on 12.10.2006. After joining the services, the petitioner discharged his duties efficiently. However, without there being any justified reason, all of a sudden on 14.3.2013, a dir...
Nanhe Khan Vs. M/S Vishal Construction Regd.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-2013
Writ Petition No.16606/2013 08.10.2013 Shri S.K.Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the petitioner. He is heard on the question of admission. Petitioner defendant has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved by the order dated 3.9.2013, (P-6).passed by the District Judge, Bhopal, in Co.No.237-A/12, whereby his application filed under Order 6, Rule 17 of CPC for inserting some additional pleadings in the WS after recording evidence of the respondents- plaintiffs has been dismissed. The petitioner's counsel after taking me through the averments of the petition as well as papers placed on record alongwith the impugned order argued that the proposed amendment was only an explanation on behalf of the petitioner to the facts which have already been stated in the initial WS, so in such premises, the proposed amendment being an additional approach of the same facts could have been allowed by the trial court but the same has been dismissed under the wrong ...
Mahesh Baiga Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-2013
1 Cr.R. No.1693/2013 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE A.K.SHRIVASTAVA CRIMINAL REVISION NO.1693/2013 APPLICANTS :1. Mahesh Baiga S/o. Suddhu Baiga, 2. Nandlal Baiga, S/o. Ganesh Baiga 3. Ramdayal S/o. Baisakhu Baiga 4. Fatelal S/o. Sahnu Baiga 5. Mottal alias Santlal, S/o. Homlal 6. Santlal, S/o. Nandua Versus RESPONDENT: State of Madhya Pradesh --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Applicants by Shri M. Safiquallah, Advocate. Respondent/State by Shri Ashok Chourasiya, Public Prosecutor. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (08/10/2013) This revision application under Section 397/401 of CrPC has been filed by the applicants against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 12.08.2013 passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Shahdol dismissing the criminal appeal No.19/2011 and thereby affirming the jud...
M.S. Khan (Mohd Suhail Khan) Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-08-2013
M.Cr.C.No.1267/2011 8/10/2013: Smt. Shobha Menon, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Rahul Choubey, for the applicant. Shri Aditya Adhikari, learned counsel for respondent No.1. None present for respondent No.2. Challenge in this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.is made to an order dated 6.10.2010 passed by the Special Magistrate, Bhopal exercising the powers under the Prevention of Corruption Act and framing charges against the petitioner for offences under Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, so also Section 120 Cr.P.C.Petitioner was an employee working with the Bhopal Development Authority, he was holding the post of Superintend Engineer at the relevant time when the impugned action was taken. The main ground of challenge in this petition to the charges framed is that on the same set of circumstances, petitioner was proceeded against departmentally, a departmental enquiry was conducted, wherein he has been exonerated of all the charge...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »