Madhya Pradesh Court February 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.
Munna Lal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-08-2013
Criminal Revision No.162 o08. 02.2013 Shri Parag S. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Alok Tapikar, learned PL for respondent-State. Heard on the question of admission. Let the records of both the courts below be requisitioned and case be listed immediately thereafter for admission. The applicant has been convicted and sentenced under Sections 304-A and under Section 3/181 of Motor Vehicle Act for one year RI with fine of Rs.1000 in the fiRs.count while one month SI with fine of Rs.100 in the later. Applicant's counsel by referring a copy of the depositions of the examined witnesses and the copy of the charge sheet prayed to hear arguments on IA No.2288/13, an application for suspension of remaining jail sentence and grant of bail to the applicant. Such referred papers are taken on record. Heard on the aforesaid IA. After perusing the depositions of alleged material prosecution witnesses from PW-1 to PW-8, in the available facts and circumstances, so also keeping in v...
M/S Hanuman Trading Company Mandi Sehore Vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR Criminal Revision No.2145/2012 M/s Hanuman Trading Company Mandi Sehore Vs. Krishi Upaj Mandi Samiti and another --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Present : Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Gupta. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name of counsel for the parties: Shri Ashish Sinha, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the respondent No.2/State. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on 7th day of February, 2013) The applicant/firm was convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 6 and 31 read with Section 48 of Krishi Upaj Mandi, Adhiniyam and sentenced with fine of `500/- vide judgment dated 29.11.2011 passed by the learned J.M.F.C. (Ku. Vineeta Bhatnagar), Sehore in criminal case No.2071/10. In cr...
Radhika Prasad Shrama Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
1 Crl.Appeal No.66/2013 Radhika Prasad Sharma State of M.P.7.2.2013 Shri Shashank Shekhar, Counsel for appellant. Shri Aditya Adhikari, Counsel for respondent. I.A.No.585/2013 for suspension of sentence under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C.and for grant of stay of fine amount Learned counsel for parties are heard. At the outset, learned counsel for appellant submits that appellant is ready to deposit fine amount. In view of aforesaid, no order is required on the prayer for grant of stay of fine amount. Accordingly, prayer for grant of stay of fine amount is rejected. So far as suspension of jail sentence is concerned, it is submitted by appellant that appellant was on bail during trial and he has not misused the liberty. Appellant is a permanent resident of District Shahdol and there is no chance that he may misuse the liberty or may abscond. Considering aforesaid and to the fact that hearing of this appeal may take sometime, prayer made in the application is allowed on following conditions...
Santosh Dwivedi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
M.Cr.C.No.556/2013 07.02.2013 None for the applicants. Shri Punit Shroti, learned PL for the respondent-State. On taking up the matter for hearing on everyday since 4.2.2013 till today no one is appearing on behalf of the applicant to prosecute this petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.Learned PL submits that in compliance of the earlier direction he is under receipt of the case diary and he is ready to argue the case on merits. With the assistance of learned PL and case diary, the case is taken up for consideration. On behalf of the applicants, this petition is preferred under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.for grant of anticipatory bail as they are under apprehension of their arrest in connection of Crime No.135/2012, registered at Police Station Semriya, district Rewa for the offence under Sections 147, 149, 302, 201 of IPC. Having heard the State's counsel, after perusing the record, I have found that there is sufficient prima facie evidence against the applicants for committing the a...
Kailash Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH ; JABALPUR Cr.R.No.2420/2012 Kailash Dimar Vs. State of M.P For the Applicant : Shri Shashank Upadhyay, Advocate. For the Respondent : Shri Alok Tapikar, Panel Lawyer. ORDER (07 /02 /2013 ) U.C. Maheshwari,J.The applicant/accused has directed this revision under section 397 read with 401 of the Cr.P.C being aggrieved by the order dated 19.12.2012 passed by the Sessions Judge, Tikamgarh district Tikamgarh in Criminal Appeal No.104/12 affirming the judgment dated 29.2.12 passed by JMFC, Tikamgarh in Criminal Case No.1365/09 whereby he has been convicted and sentenced under section 456 of the IPC for RI 6 months with fine of Rs.500/- in default of depositing the fine for further jail sentence.2. The facts giving rise to this revision in short are that on dated 12.9.09, at about 8.30 in the night, the complainant/prosecutrix Rajjo Bai accompanied with her children went to sleep in her residence. At abut 11 O' clock in the night, she heard the noise of some pe...
Hans Kumar Gawle Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
WP 10537.11 Writ Petition No.10537 of 2011 (Hans Kumar Gawle and four others v. State of M.P.and eight otheRs.07-02-2013 None for the petitioneRs.Shri A.K.Sharma, learned Panel lawyer, for the respondents/State on advance notice. Perused the record. Petitioners by way of present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seek direction to the respondents to grant two advance increments in lieu of they having acquired Bachelor of Education/ Diploma in Education/ Basic Teachers Instruction (B.Ed/D.Ed/B.T.I) qualification while in service. The aforesaid relief has been claimed on the basis of the decision of the Apex Court in Asha Saxena V. State of M.P and otheRs.SLP (Civil) No.18881/06 wherein the claim of Assistant Teachers appointed prior to 16.6.1993 for grant of two advance increments in lieu of acquiring (B.Ed/D.Ed/B.TI) was upheld (In respect of grant of two advance increments it has a relevance because w.e.f 17.6.1993 relevant rule for recruitment of teachers p...
Ku. Sampat Charmkar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
M.Cr.C.No.1020/2013 7.2.2013 Shri ArubendraSingh, counsel for the applicant. Shri Sameer Chile, GA for the State. Heard. This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.The applicant is in custody since 14.12.2012 in connection with Crime No.484/2012 registered at Police Station Nagod, District Satna for offence punishable under Sections 382, 392/34 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that four persons have committed robbery and snatched a mobile and some amount from the complainant. She is not involved in the said robbery. Applicant is a lady of 25 years of age and if she remained in jail for long time, her career will be spoiled Charge sheet has already been filed and trial would take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, prays for grant of bail to applicant. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer. On due consideration of the contentions raised ...
Ramdas Malvi Vs. Smt. Sunita Malvi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
Cr.R.No.1660 o07. 02.13 Shri Rajendra Gupta, counsel for the applicant. Shri Sankalp Kochhar, counsel for the respondents. This matter is listed today along with the record of M.Cr.C.No.13738/11 filed by the respondents herein against the impugned order of the revisional court for further enhancement of the sum awarded to them as maintenance. Such M.Cr.C is listed by giving the separate number in the cause list. In the couRs.of the arguments on admission as well as for final disposal of this revision, on making some query from the applicant's counsel whether the applicant is working as permanent employee in the Railway Department or he is working in some private institution who is working as contractor of the Railway department, on which, applicant's counsel submits that today is not in a position to make any submission with respect of this query and seeks short adjournment to make statement on such question after taking some instructions from the applicant. Considering such prayer, th...
Tarachand Vishwakarma Vs. Smt. Pushpa Devi Vishwakarma
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
A.F.R. Judge IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.Criminal Revision No.534/2011 Tarachand Vishwakarma VERSUS Smt.Pushpa Devi Vishwakarma --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Ashok Pandey, counsel for the applicant. Shri Arun Kakoniya, counsel for the respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 8th day of February, 2013) The applicant has preferred the present revision against the order dated 21.2.2011 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Jabalpur in MJ.No.605/2009. whereby a maintenance of Rs.2,000/- p.m. was granted to the respondent alongwith a cost of Rs.1,000/-.2. The facts of the case, in short, are that, the respondent moved an application under section 125 of the Cr.P.C. that she came into the contact of the applicant in the year 1988. In July, 1989, marriage of the respondent took place with the applicant in...
Pramod Kumar Barman Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-07-2013
WP 10545.11 Writ Petition No.10545 of 2011 (Pramod Kumar Barman v. State of M.P.and sixteen otheRs.07-02-2013 None for the petitioneRs.Shri A.K.Sharma, learned Panel lawyer, for the respondents/State on advance notice. Perused the record. Petitioners by way of present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seek direction to the respondents to grant two advance increments in lieu of they having acquired Bachelor of Education/ Diploma in Education/ Basic Teachers Instruction (B.Ed/D.Ed/B.T.I) qualification while in service. The aforesaid relief has been claimed on the basis of the decision of the Apex Court in Asha Saxena V. State of M.P and otheRs.SLP (Civil) No.18881/06 wherein the claim of Assistant Teachers appointed prior to 16.6.1993 for grant of two advance increments in lieu of acquiring (B.Ed/D.Ed/B.TI) was upheld (In respect of grant of two advance increments it has a relevance because w.e.f 17.6.1993 relevant rule for recruitment of teachers provided for...
- ‹ Prev
- 105
- 106
- 107
- 108
- 109
- 111
- 112
- 113
- 114
- 115
- Next ›
- Last »