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.
Krishnarao ` Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
Krishnarao Vs. State of M.P. & Others Writ Appeal No.212 19. 3.2013: Shri Sanjay Singh, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri Prashant Singh, learned Additional Advocate General for respondents, on advance notice. Challenge in this writ appeal under Section 2(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Uchhya Nyayalaya (Khand Nyay Peeth Ko Appeal) Adhiniyam, 2005 is made to an order dated 5.2.2013 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No.1273/2013.2. Appellant was working as Senior Agricultural Development Officer in the department of Farmer Welfare and Agricultural Development. In the year 2007, he was posted in District Chhindwara, when he was proceeded against and prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 295 of IPC in Criminal Case No.894/2004. He was tried and convicted for the said offence vide judgment dated 25.4.2007, he was sentenced to undergo 1 year imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/-. As his conviction was a bar for continuing him in employment, his convicti...
Mahoom Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
Criminal Revision No.1904/2011 19.03.2013 Shri Sankalp Kochar, counsel for the applicants. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. Shri Ramesh Tamrakar, counsel for the objector. As prayed by counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. The applicants have challenged the order dated 11.10.2011 passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Chhatarpur in S.T.No.302/2011, whereby the charges of the offences punishable under Sections 307/34 of IPC were framed against the applicants. The prosecution's case, in short is that, on 2.7.2011 at about 10:00 a.m.the applicants gathered in front of the house of Ram Prakash Patel situated in village Para (Police Station Rajnagar, District Chhatarpur) and thereafter, they assaulted the victim Mahendra Singh by various weapons. It is also alleged against the applicants that they assaulted the victim by the base of a gun. After due investigation, a charge sheet was filed before the competent Court. After considering t...
V.S. Trivedi Vs. M.P. Road Transport Corporation
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
1 HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR W.A. No.775/2010 M.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION VS. V. S. TRIVEDI W.A. NO.931/2010 V. S. TRIVEDI VS. M.P. STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION Present: Honble Shri S. A. Bobde, CJ & Hon'ble Shri Rajendra Menon, J.In W.A. No.775/2010 Shri P. C. Chandak, learned counsel for the appellant. Respondent in person. In W.A. No.931/2010 Appellant in person. Shri P.C. Chandak, learned counsel for respondent Corporation. _________________________________________________ As per : Hon'ble Shri Rajendra Menon, J.JUDGMENT ( 1932013 ) 2 Both these appeals are filed challenging an order dated 31.8.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. No.5483/1998 and therefore, both the appeals are being decided by this common order. For the sake of convenience documents and material available in the record of W.A. No.775/2010 is being referred to in this order.2. Respondent Shri V. S. Trivedi was working in the M.P. State Road Tran...
Abhishek Upadhyay Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
M.Cr.C.No.1856/2013 19/03/2013 Shri S. Dixit, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Om Prakash Choubey, Advocate for the Objector. Shri C.K.Mishra, GA for the respondent/State. Heard finally. This is the fiRs.application filed by applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C for grant of bail. Applicant has been arrested on 12/01/13 in connection with Crime No.772/12 registered at P.S.Gorakhpur, District Jabalpur for the offence punishable under sections 380, 457, 436, 201 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that though some articles said to have been seized from the possession of this applicant but same has not been identified by the complainant. There is no possibility of his absconding. Charge sheet has already been filed and trial would take considerable time to be disposed of finally therefore, he prays for bail to the applicant. Learned counsel for the State opposes the application. Considering t...
M.P.E.B. and anr Vs. Smt.Tara Bai and ors
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
F.A. No.115/2004 -1- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: Honble Shri Justice A.K. Shrivastava F.A. No.115/2004 APPELLANTS 1 Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board Defendants through Divisional Engineer, M.P.E.B. Division Narsinghpur, Distt. Narsinghpur 2. Incharge Officer, Rural Area M.P. Electricity Board, Gotegaon, Tah. Gotegaon, Distt. Narsinghpur -Versus- RESPONDENTS:1. Smt. Tarabai @ Munnibai w/o Vishal Plaintiffs Singh Lodhi 2. Manot Kumar s/o Vishal Singh Lodhi 3. Ku. Dharmabai @ Bhagwatibai d/o Vishal Singh Lodhi 4. Ku. Mantabai d/o Vishal Singh (2 to 4 through guardian Tarab mother) All R/o village Garra, P.S. Kanjai, P.S. And Tahsil Gotegaon, Distt. Narsinghpur, M.P. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Arup K. Das, Advocate for the appellants. Shri G.S. Baghel, Advocate for the respondents. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT {19032013} Feeling aggrieved...
Kamlesh Prasad Gupta Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
Mcr.C.No.2478 o19. 03.13 Shri A.P.Singh and Shri Nokesh Dubey, counsel for the applicants. Shri Vivek Lakhera, PL for the respondent/state. Heard. The applicants have preferred this petition under section 482 of the Cr.P.C for quashment of the criminal proceedings of ST No.302/10 pending in the court of I ASJ.Sidhi which was initiated against them by Police Station Kusmi district Sidhi after holding the investigation of Crime No.50/10 registered at the instance of the police constable Vikas Pandey on dated 2.6.2010 for the offence of section 353,332,294 read with section 34 of the IPC.2. Applicants counsel after taking me through the papers placed on the record including the FIR as well as the interrogatory statements of the witnesses recorded under section 161 of the Cr.P.C argued that on lodging the initial FIR by the constable, the name of any of the present applicants was not stated as culprit of the incident even the eye-witnesses named in the FIR have not stated the name of prese...
Manish Soni Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
M.Cr.C.No.2997/2013 19.3.2013 Shri Himanshu Chourasia, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Akhilendra Singh, GA for the State. This is the fiRs.bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of bail. The applicant is in custody since 31.12.2012 in connection with Crime No.456/2012 registered at P.S.City Kotwali, District Chhatarpur for the offence punishable under Sections 344, 363, 366-A, 371, 372, 373, 376 (chh) of the IPC, Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and Sections 3, 4, 5 of the Immoral Trafficking Act. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Name of the applicant is not mentioned in the FIR. The prosecutrix is more than 18 years of age. Charge sheet has been filed. Similarly placed co-accused Rupesh Sahu has been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 5.3.2013 passed in M.Cr.C.No.1929/2013. The applicant is in custody and trial would take considerab...
Buddhu Kol Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3278/2013 19.3.2013 Shri Narendra Nikhare, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Akhilendra Singh, GA for the State. This is the fiRs.bail application filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of bail. The applicant is in custody since 26.12.2012 in connection with POR No.268/02 registered by Forest Range Officer, Badwara, District Katni for the offence punishable under sections 9, 39, 50, 51 of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. All offences are triable by the Magistrate. Charge sheet has been filed. The applicant is in custody and trial would take considerable time to conclude, therefore, he be released on bail. Learned counsel for State has opposed the application. On due consideration of the contention raised by the learned counsel for the parties and overall facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case to rele...
Virendra Kumar Gupta Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
Mcr.C.No.1339 o19. 03.13 Shri Bhupendra Shukla, counsel for the applicant. Shri Vivek Lakhera, PL for the respondent/state. Heard on the question of admission. The applicant's counsel after taking me through the annexed copy of the FIR taken by the applicant under the RTI Act so also the averments of the petition argued that on taking into consideration the averments of the FIR as accepted in its entirety even then the ingredients of any of the alleged offence is not made out against the applicant. In continuation he said that without any proper foundation the name of the applicant has been implicated as an accused in the matter stating that by practicing the fraud the alleged offence of impersonation as well as fabricating the forged document was committed by the co-accused with his assistance. In such premises, he prayed to admit and allow this petition with further prayer to quash the FIR till the extent of the present applicant.2. Having heard, keeping in view the arguments advance...
Ramanuj Soni Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
M.Cr.C.No.88/2013 M.Cr.C.No.90/2013 19.3.2013 Shri Pushpendra Verma, Advocate for the applicants. Shri Chandrakant Mishra, PL for the State. These are the fiRs.bail applications filed by the applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of bail. The applicants are in custody since 16.10.2012 in connection with Crime No.374/2012 registered at P.S.Mada, District Singroli for the offence punishable under sections 294, 323, 506, 302/34 of the IPC. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. According to the prosecution story, it is alleged that co-accused Aaditya assaulted deceased Lalchand by using sharp edged weapon and the applicants assaulted the deceased by using lathis. As per MLC, the deceased sustained lacerated wounds on his leg. The applicants are in custody and trial would take considerable time to conclude, therefore, they be released on bail. Learned counsel for State has opposed the applications. I have...
- ‹ Prev
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- Next ›
- Last »