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.
Smt. Gayatri Devi Verma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-2013
M.CR.C.NO :14378. / 2012 Smt. Gayatri Devi Verma versus State of Madhya Pradesh 05.02.2013. Shri K.D.Singh for the applicant. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Panel Lawyer, for the State. Shri M.K.Pandey for the objector. Heard. Case diary perused. Applicant apprehends her arrest in Crime No.93/2012 registered at Police Station Java, District Rewa for offences registered under sections 304-B and 498-A read with section 34 of the IPC and under sections of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Applicant is sister-in-law of the deceased and records indicate that no specific overt act is attributed to her. On the contrary she is being implicated only on the basis of the statement of the brother and mother of the deceased to the effect that applicant and other family members had been harassing the deceased. According to the applicant, she was in the family way and even before the incident took place she was in her house and she has produced a certificate indicate delivery of a child to her on 4.10.2012. Lea...
Gajju [Since Deceased] Lr\'s Sriram Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-2013
C.R.No.46/2013 05.02.2013 Shri Umesh Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicant. The default as pointed out by the office is ignored. After examining the laws, learned counsel for the applicant fairly contends that direct approach to the Civil Court by filing an application for making reference would not be proper remedy. On the other hand, the remedy would be by making an application before the Court where the reference made by the Collector is already pending, for impleadment of the applicant as a party in the said proceedings or to raise claim in terms of the provision of Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, in case any higher compensation is granted by the reference Court to any of the claimants. In view of the aforesaid, learned counsel for the applicant prays permission to withdraw this revision petition with liberty to make an appropriate application in appropriate manner before the appropriate Forum as stated hereinabove and submit that in case any such claim is made...
Tukaram Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-2013
M.CR.C.NO :14545. / 2012 Tukaram versus State of Madhya Pradesh 05.02.2013. Shri Mukesh Pandey for the applicant. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Panel Lawyer, for the State. Heard. Case diary perused. Applicant has been arrested in Crime No.99/2012 registered at Police Station Navegaon, District Chhindwara for offence registered under sections 302, 201 and 120-B read with section 34 of the IPC. He is in custody since 31.7.2012. Co-accused Roshan Maske has been granted bail by this Court. Case of the applicant is also identical to that of co-accused Roshan Maske. There is no direct evidence to implicate the applicant. He is only implicated on the basis of certain circumstances and recovery of a stone, which is said to have been used for committing the offence. As co-accused has been granted bail under similar circumstances, there is no reason for not extending similar benefit to the applicant. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. In view of the...
Mehboob @ Phool Miya Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-2013
M.Cr.C.No.1110/2013 05/02/2013 Shri Anurag Shivhare, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Santosh Yadav, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The applicant is facing a criminal trial for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 of IPC. Earlier he was granted bail but because of his not appearance on one occasion the bail bond of applicant was forfeited and he was taken in custody. The applicant made an application for grant of bail but the same was rejected. A repeated application was rejected therefore, he has filed this application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.for grant of bail before this Court. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was suffering from Hernia and Stone trouble for which he was required to undergo surgery. This fact was not communicated to the counsel for the applicant and, therefore, the application for exemption from personal appearance could not be filed and treating th...
Dr. Kamlesh Kumar Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3587/2011 5.2.2013 Shri A.M.Trivedi, Sr.Counsel with Shri S.K.Mishra, Adv.for the petitioner. Ms.Pratibha Mishra, PL for the State. The petitioner has filed this petition invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.for quashing charge sheet (P-7) filed against the petitioner in Crime No.147/2010 registered at P.S.Pali, District Umaria for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 120-B, 34 of the IPC. Learned Sr.Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on the basis of enquiry report (P-1).a report has been lodged against 6 persons including the petitioner for misappropriation of amount and food grains. The petitioner was posted as CEO, Janpad Panchayat, Pali. The petitioner was not found responsible for misappropriation of food grains according to the report. The only allegation against the petitioner is that he made advance payment of charges for transportation of food grains by a cheque dated 19.4.2006 for Rs.47,829/-. L...
Mathura Prasad Khatik Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-2013
Cr.R.No.1936/2012 05.02.2013 Shri Manish Datt, learned Senior Advocate with Shri Nishant Datt, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Aditya Adhikari, Advocate for the respondent. This petition is directed against an order dated 04.09.2012 passed by Special Judge under Prevention of Corruption Act, Tikamgarh in Special Session Trial No.01/2011, by which a charge under Section 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was framed against the applicant. Shri Datt, learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that there is no evidence against the applicant, but in spite of this, charge has been framed against him. He has referred various documents to show that there is no evidence against the applicant. Even in the F.I.R.though allegations are against the Chief Municipal Officer namely Arun Kumar Shukla, but not the applicant. He has also referred various documents in support of his contention. Shri Aditya Adhikari, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State submits that after ...
Pappu @ Kamal Kishore Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-2013
M.CR.C.NO :14626. / 2012 Pappu @ Kamal Kishore versus State of Madhya Pradesh 05.02.2013. Shri G.S.Ahluwalia for the applicant. Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Panel Lawyer, for the State. Heard. Case diary perused. Applicant has been arrested in Crime No.552/2011 registered at Police Station ItaRs.for offences registered under sections 302, 201, 394 and 397 of the IPC. He is in custody since 23.3.2012. Body of deceased Phoolmati was found in the field of Jagdish Rawat and information with regard to the same was given by Shri Manohar Lal. The only material available against the petitioner to implicate him with the crime is recovery of a Silver Kada from his possession, which allegedly belongs to the deceased. However, there is no identification of the Kada and the fact with regard to its ownership with deceased Phoolmati is also not established from the evidence available on record. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant. Considering the aforesaid...
Milan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : JABALPUR Criminal Revision No.1432/2006 Milan s/o Sudarshan Jain Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh For the applicant : Shri Harpreet Ruprah, Advocate For the Respondent: Shri Puneet Shroti, Panel Lawyer ORDER (05.02.2013) U.C. Maheshwari J.The applicant/accused has preferred this revision being aggrieved by the judgment dated 8.7.2004 passed by Sessions Judge, Sagar in Criminal Appeal No.18/2004 affirming the judgment dated 13.2.2004 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deori in Criminal Case No.42/1994 whereby the applicant has been convicted and sentenced under Section 325 IPC for RI of 1 year with fine of Rs.1000/-; in default of payment of fine further RI of 3 months.2. The facts giving rise to this revision in short are that on 21.4.1994 at about 8.30 p.m. at Khanderao Ward, Deori on account of some quarrel regarding demand of money complainant Dashrath (PW-1) was abused by the applicant with filthy language and in continuation of such act also ...
Ajay Singh Kushwaha Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-2013
1...W.P.No.16066 of 2012 Ajay Singh Kushwaha State of M.P.& otheRs.05.02.2013 Shri Greeshm Jain, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Agrawal, G.A.for respondent No.1. Smt. Shobha Menon, learned Senior Advocate with Shri C.A.Thomas, Counsel for respondent No.2. The petitioner has sought following reliefs:- 1. The Hon. Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record.2. This Hon. Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to give admission to the petitioner in the B.A.L.L.B (Hon.) couRs.in a vacant seat in the current academic year.3. To issue any other suitable direction/order looking to the facts and grounds of the petition and also award cost of the petition. Case of the petitioner is that the petitioner had applied for admission in B.A.L.L.B.(Hon.) CouRs.under respondent No.2. The petitioner belongs to OBC category and was called for counselling but on the date when the counselling was convened i.e.5.7.2012, petitioner was not possessing mark- sheet of qualifyi...
Dr. Beenu Kushwaha Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Feb-05-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR W.A.No.255/2009 Dr.Beenu Kushwah, D/o Dr.Rajendra Singh Kushwah, Aged about 31 years, Senior Resident Doctor in Lady Harding Medical College, New Delhi .Appellant Versus 1. State of Madhya Pradesh, Through the Secretary Medical Education, Govt. of M.P. Mantralaya, Bhopal (M.P.) 2. Director, Department of Medical Education, Govt. of M.P., Bhopal (M.P.) 3. Chief Executive Officer and Dean S.S.Medical College, Rewa (M.P.) 4. Dr.Swati Singh, W/o Dr.Sankalp Singh, Aged about 27 years, C/o Dean Medical College, Rewa (M.P.) ....Respondents Present : Hon. Shri Justice Krishn Kumar Lahoti Hon.(Smt.) Justice Vimla Jain Shri P.N.Pathak, counsel for appellant. Shri Vijay Pandey, Dy.A.G., for respondents. JUDGMENT (5.2.2013) Per Krishn Kumar Lahoti, J : This appeal is directed under section 2(1) of the M.P.Uchch Nyayalaya (Khand Nyayapeeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam 2005, 2 W.A.No.255/2009 Dr.Beenu Kushwah Vs State of M.P. & others assailing the order dated 3.3.2009...
- ‹ Prev
- 119
- 120
- 121
- 122
- 123
- 125
- 126
- 127
- 128
- 129
- Next ›
- Last »