Madhya Pradesh Court March 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.
MoIn Ansari Vs. Mehmood Ahmad
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
C.R. No.195/2012 -1- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: Honble Shri Justice A.K. Shrivastava C.R. No.195/2012 APPLICANT Moin Ansari s/o Late Mohiuddin Bhure, R/o Nonelal-Ki-Gali, Near Old Bridge, Gohalpur, Jabalpur Versus RESPONDENTS 1 Mehmood Ahmad s/o Sheikh Babu, R/o Behind Gohalpur, Police Station, Ahmadnagar, Jabalpur ... Decree Holder 2. Mohd. Bashir s/o Late Noor Mohd.3. Baby d/o Late Moiuddin Bhure 4. Jamaluddin @ Pappu s/o Late Mohiuddin Bhure 5. Seema d/o Late Mohiuddin Bhure 6. Sahiba d/o Late Mohiuddin Bhure All R/o Nonelal-ki-Gali, Behind House of Kallu Bania, Gohalpur, Jabalpur. ... Judgment debtors ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Devashish Sakalkar, Advocate for the applicant. Shri L.N. Tripathi, Advocate for the respondent No.1. None for other respondents though served. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER {20032013} This revision applicatio...
Vinod Mehant Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.2028/2013 20.3.2013 Shri Himanshu Chaurasiya, counsel for the applicant. Shri R.K.Kesharwani, PL, for the State. Heard. This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.The applicant is in custody since 23.11.2012 in connection with Crime No.273/2009 registered at Police Station Garhakota, District Sagar for offence punishable under Sections 307/34 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He was not the main accused in the case. Nothing is alleged against this applicant in regard to commission of offence punishable under Section 307 of IPC. The only allegation against this applicant is that he instigated the co-accused to make a fire. 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 by the counsel for the parties along with facts and circumstances of the c...
Habib Khan Vs. Smt.Jaitun Bi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
1 C.R. No.42/09 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: Honble Shri Justice A.K. Shrivastava Civil Revision No.42/2009 APPELLANTS:1. Habib Khan, S/o Shri Amir Khan, occupation Nil 2. Shri Husaina Bi, W/o Shri Sheikh Habib Khan, Occupation nil.3. Salim Khan, S/o Habib Khan, Occupation Agriculturist All R/o Khari Bawdi, Presently at Maharani Laxmibai Ward, Mohd. Khan Patel Marg, Khandwa, Tahsil and District Khandwa(M.P.) Versus RESPONDENTS: Smt. Jaitun Bi through legal heirs 1. Yunus Khan S/o Late Ahmed Khan 2. Yusuf Khan S/o Late Ahmed Khan Both residents of Gulshan Nagar, Moghat Road, Khandwa (M.P.) 3. Munna Khan S/o Late Ahmed Khan, R/o Radha Peth, City Bus Shop, Badmera Road, Amravati(MS) Shri Sanjay Sarvate, for the applicants. Shri K.S. Rajput, for the respondent. 2 C.R. No.42/09 ORDER (20.03.2013) 1. This revision application under Section 23-E of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (for brevity the 'Act of 1961') has been filed by the defendant against the evicti...
Nanhe Karia @ Nanhe Bhai Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.2201/2013 20.3.2013 Shri R.B.Gautam, Advocate for the applicants. Shri Pushpraj Singh, PL for the State. This is the fiRs.bail application filed by the applicants under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of bail. The applicants are in custody since 6.7.2012 in connection with Crime No.372/2012 registered at P.S.Hanumantal, District Jabalpur for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the IPC. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. Initially report was lodged by Ajay Saket that deceased was lying in a Nala and during investigation, some witnesses stated that the applicants accompanied the deceased and at the time of cross the Nala, they pushed the deceased, however, during trial the said witnesses like Dipak, Dinesh and Rakesh did not support the case of the prosecution. All the them have been declared hostile. The applicants are in custody and trial would take considerable time to conclude, therefore, t...
Neelesh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.1932/2013 M.Cr.C.No.1933/2013 20/03/2013 Shri Pranay Verma, Advocate for the applicants. Shri Alok Vagrecha, Advocate for the Objector. Shri R.K.Kesharwani, PL for the respondent/State. Heard finally. As these applications are arising out of the same crime number therefore, they are being decided by this common order. These are the fiRs.applications filed by applicants under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C for grant of anticipatory bail. The applicants are apprehending their arrest in connection with Crime No.16/13, registered at police station Khurai, District Sagar for the offence punishable under section 3 (1) (10) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that applicants Neelesh, Jeetu Loki and Jitendra are by caste Ahirwar and they belongs to Scheduled Tribes therefore, no case is made out against them u/s 3 (1) (10) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atroc...
Vijay @ Jhalla Basore Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.Criminal Revision No.56/2013 Vijay @ Jhalla Basore & another VERSUS The State of Madhya Pradesh --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri U.K.Tripathi, counsel for the applicant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 20th day of March, 2013) The applicants were convicted for the offence punishable under section 379 of IPC vide judgment dated 11.1.2012 passed by the learned JMFC, Satna (Shri A.K.Singh) in criminal case No.349/2009 and each sentenced for 2 years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.200/-. In criminal appeal No.34/2012, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Satna vide judgment dated 21.12.2012, maintained the conviction but, reduced the sentence to the period of 1 year, whereas, no modification has been done in the fine a...
Nasir Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
Cr.R.No.2211/2012 20.3.2013 Shri Anand Naik, counsel for the applicants. Shri S.K.Kashyap, Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State. As prayed by learned counsel for the parties, matter is heard finally. The applicants have challenged the order dated 2.11.2012 passed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara in ST No.287/2012 whereby the charge of offence punishable under section 307 of I.P.C was framed against the applicants along with the other charges. The prosecution's case relating to the present revision in short is that, on 13.9.2012 the applicants assaulted the various victims including Anand Sharma and Omkar. After due investigation a charge sheet was filed. A charge of offence punishable under Section 307 of I.P.C was framed against the applicants for the victims Anand Sharma and Omkar. After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, it is apparent that it is alleged against the 10 persons that they assaulted various victims incl...
Ram Narayan Pandey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
M.Cr.C. No.2886/2013 20.3.2013 Shri B.J. Chourasiya, counsel for the applicant. Shri Akhilendra Kumar Singh, GA, for the State. Heard. This is an application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No. 15/2013 registered at Police Station Rajnagar, District Chhatarpur for the offences punishable under Sections 186, 294, 506B of IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case, who have no criminal past alleged against him. As per fiRs. information report, complainant has not stated anything about humiliation caused by the applicant. Initially the offences punishable under Section 186, 294 and 506B of IPC has been registered against the applicant. Thereafter, complainant has made concocted statement under Section 161 of Cr.P...
Jaanki Prasad Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.2059/2013 20.3.2013 Shri Pradeep Naveria, Advocate for the applicants. Shri Chandrakant Mishra, GA for the State. This is the fiRs.bail application filed by the applicants under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of bail. The applicants are in custody since 6.11.2012 in connection with Crime No.67/2012 registered at P.S.Lamta, District Balaghat for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120-B/34 of the IPC. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. There is no direct evidence against the applicants that they committed murder of Phool Singh. The applicants have been falsely implicated with the aid of Section 120-B of the IPC, however, no clinching evidence has been collected by the prosecution in regard to the involvement of the applicants in the conspiracy. The only allegation against the applicants is that they were the member of a meeting in which it was stated about the deceased that he was involved i...
Arjun Basdeva Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2013
M.Cr.C.No.2013/2013 20.3.2013 Shri Sandeep Shukla, counsel for the applicant. Shri R.K.Kesharwani, PL, for the State. Heard. This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.The applicant is in custody since 27.7.2012 in connection with Crime No.193/2012 registered at Police Station Semariya, District Bhopal for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376/34 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Prosecutrix Rajwati had gone with the applicant on her own will. She lived with him for about 9 days. She is more than 16 years of age, therefore no case is made out against this applicant for an offence punishable under Section 376 of IPC. 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 by the counsel for the parties along with facts and circumstances of the case, w...
- ‹ Prev
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- Next ›
- Last »