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.
M.P.E.B. Th.S.E.Mpeb. Vs. Smt.Shanti Gupta and anr
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2013
F.A. No.376/2004 -1- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: Honble Shri Justice A.K. Shrivastava F.A. No.376/2004 1. M.P.E.B. Through S.E., M.P.E.B. District Sidhi ...Appellants/Defendant -Versus- 1. Smt. Shanti Gupta w/o Late Shri Mangal Prasad Gupta R/o Kudiya, Police Station and Tehsil Rampur Naikin, Dist. Sidhi 2. Ramdas Yadav (dead) The legal representative of Ramdas Yadav I. Smt. Yashoda Bai w/o Late Ramdas Yadav II. Rampal Yadav s/o Late Ramdas Yadav III. Rajmani Yadav s/o Late Ramdas Yadav IV. Dhreemani Yadav s/o Late Ramdas Yadav v. Biresh Yadav s/o Late Ramdas Yadav VI. Naresh Yadav s/o Late Ramdas Yadav vii. Ramsujan Yadav s/o Late Ramdas Yadav VIII. Pandit Yadav s/o Late Ramdas Yadav Respondent No.2 (vii) and 2(iii) Minors through natural guardian mother Smt. Yashoda Bai w/o Late Shri Ramdas Yadav, all R/o village Kudiya, P.S. And Tehsil Rampur Naikin, Dist. Sidhi (M.P.) 3. Dharamdas s/o Late Mangal Prasad 4. Nandlal s/o Late Mangal Prasad 5. Anantlal s/o Late...
Kali Ram Singrare Vs. Smt.Prabha Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.Criminal Revision No.1205/1996 Kaliram Singrare VERSUS Smt. Prabha Bai --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Awadesh Gupta, counsel for the applicant. None for the respondent No.1. Shri G.S.Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State/ respondent No.2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 1st day of April, 2013) The applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under section 494 of IPC vide judgment dated 1.3.1996 passed by the learned JMFC, Mandla (Smt.Anita Dehariya) in criminal case No.976/1992 and sentenced for 1 year's rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/-. In criminal appeal No.15/1996, the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Mandla vide judgment dated 13.12.1996 dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved with the judgments passed by both the Courts below, the applicant has preferred th...
Shivam Sonker Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3645/2013 26.3.2013 Shri Narayan Dubey, counsel for the applicant. Shri R.K.Kesharwani, PL, for the State. Heard on IA No.7230/2013, an application for urgent hearing. Considering the averment, the application is allowed. This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.for grant of bail. The applicant has been arrested in connection with Crime No.84/2013 registered at Police Station Lordganj, District Jabalpur for offence punishable under Section 34 (2) of M.P.Excise Act. As per prosecution, it is alleged that 70 bulk liters illicit liquor is said to have been seized from the possession of the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is in custody since 27.2.2013. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Trial would take considerable time to conclude finally, therefore, he prays for grant of bail. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail. On due consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case alongwith g...
Ashok Kumar Shrivastava Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2013
M.Cr.C.No.2948/2013 M.Cr.C.No.2947/2013 26.3.2013 Shri Vipin Yadav, counsel for the applicant(s).Shri R.K.Kesharwani, PL, for the respondent/State. Heard on IA No.6929/2013 and 6928/2013, the applications for urgent hearing. Considering the averments of the applications, the same are allowed. The applicants are in custody since 20.2.2013 in connection with Crime No.47/13 registered at P.S.Morwa, District Singroli for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 201 of IPC As per prosecution, it is alleged against the applicants that they have the password of ATM from where Rs.34 lacs and CPU, said to have been stolen. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that they are the bank employees and after making their arrest, nothing has been seized from their possession. They are ready to cooperate in the investigation and there is no possibility of flee away from justice. Trial would take considera...
Mohd. Aslam Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2013
Criminal Revision No.1928/2011 26.3.2013 Shri Manish Tiwari, counsel for the applicant. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, it is directed that the trial Court in compliance to the judgment dated 21.9.2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chhindwara in criminal appeal No.118/2011, shall hear the learned counsel for the parties finally and shall specifically decide all counts charges, according to the law and if the accused is found guilty for each charge then, it would be specified that the sentence passed for each count shall run concurrently or not. By the judgment dated 21.9.2011, the learned Sessions Judge did not direct for retrial and after pronouncement of the judgment by the trial Court, the applicant has his right to raise all such objections before the appellate Court. With the aforesaid directions, the present revision application is hereby disposed off. A copy of the order be sent to the tr...
Naresh Gupta Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2013
Cr.R.No.521/2010 26.3.2013 None for the applicants even in the second round. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the State. Vide order dated 21.4.2010 it was directed that necessary steps be taken for the service of notice to the respondent no.2 and if steps are not taken within seven days then the revision shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Bench. It is highly objectionable that the concerned D.A did not comply the order dated 21.4.2010. Learned counsel for the applicants is not appearing since April 2010 and therefore, it appears that he does not want to prosecute the present revision. Consequently, the present revision filed by the applicants Naresh Gupta and Raj Kumar Pandey against the order dated 28.1.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Shahdol in ST. No.44/2009 is hereby dismissed in want of prosecution. Copy of the order be sent to the trial Court with the information that the stay order granted in the case is hereby vaca...
M.P.E.B. Vs. Chhotella Sahu
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2013
F.A. No.169/2001 -1- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH: Honble Shri Justice A.K. Shrivastava F.A. No.169/2001 1. M.P. Electricity Board through Secretary, Shakti Nagar, Rampur, Jabalpur 2. Superintending Engineer M.P. Electricity Borad, Prem Nagar, Thana City Kotwali Satna (M.P.) ...Appellants/Defendants -Versus- 1. Chhotelal Sahu s/o Chhakodi Sahu village : Chorimari, Dist. Satna (M.P.) 2. Smt. Shyamkali w/o Chhotelal Sahu R/o Chorimari, Tahsil Rampur Baghelan, Dist. Satna (M.P.) ... Respondents/plaintiffs 3. Bhaiyalal Mishra @ Bhaiyan @Pujari s/o Shambhu Pd. Mishra, R/o Chorimari Baratola, Thana Tahsil Rampur Baghelan, Dist. Satna (M.P.) ... Defendant No.3 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Shri R.S. Jaiswal, Senior Advocate with Shri K.K. Gautam, Advocate for the appellants. Shri Mayank Singh Thakur, Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2. Shri S.D. Khan, Advocate for the respondent No.3. ------------------------------...
Shri Atma Dev Mishra Vs. Cent Bank Home Finance Limited
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2013
Writ Petition No :5362. / 2013 Shri Atma Dev Mishra versus Cent Bank Home Finance Ltd and others 26.03.2013. Shri A.C.Thakur for the petitioner. Petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the order- dated 13.2.2013 Annexure A/1, passed by the respondent bank rejecting a prayer made by the petitioner in an application filed purportedly under section 13(8) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as Act of 2002).Records indicate that challenging the same action petitioner has already filed an application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, the same is pending, and the proceedings are fixed before the Tribunal on 1.4.2013. It is only stated that the Presiding Officer is on leave and, therefore, this writ petition is filed. However, the petition is filed mainly to say that before the Presiding Officer takes over, the sale and auction proceedings should not be undertaken. A perusal of the o...
Suyash Fauzdar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2013
1 M. Cr.C.No.13454/2012. 26.3.2013 . Shri S.B.Shrivastava, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Vivek Lakhera, learned PL for the respondent No.1. Shri Amit Dubey, learned counsel for the victim/ complainant. The applicant/ accused has filed this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashment of the FIR registered as Crime No.473/2012, at Police Station Kotwali District Damoh and entire investigation of the same as well as the charge sheet filed before the Court having the territorial jurisdiction. Initially after taking me through the averments of the FIR as well as the petition the applicant's counsel argued the matter at length for admission and allowing the petition but in view of some averments of the FIR, interrogatory statements of the victim and his witnesses so also other papers of the charge sheet available in the case diary on making certain query from the applicant's counsel asking how this petition could be entertained at this stage by ignoring such available prima...
Abhinandan Diwakar Vs. Smt. Kanta Diwakar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-26-2013
1 Cr. R. No.06/2013 HIGH COURT OF M. P. JUDICATURE AT JABALPUR CRIMINAL REVISION NO.06/2013. Petitioners : Daulat Singh Vishwakarma and others. Versus. Respondents : State of M. P. and another For the petitioners : Shri Anil Khare, Senior Advocate Assisted by Shri Harjas Singh, Adv. For the respondents : Shri Punit Shroti, P. L. ORDER (Passed on 26.03.2013) Per U. C. Maheshwari J.1. The applicants/co-accused namely (1) Daulat Singh Vishwakarma (2) Nikhil Kumar Deshpande and (3) Narayan @ Satyanarayan have filed this revision under Section 397/401 of Criminal Procedure Code (in short the Code.) for quashment of the order dated 5.11.2011 passed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar in S. T. No.179/2010, whereby the charges for the offence punishable under Sections 468 and 471 of IPC have been framed against each of the applicants.2. The facts giving rise to this revision in short are that respondent No.2 herein initially filed a private complaint (Ann. P.2) on 16.6.2008 in the Court of...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »