Madhya Pradesh Court April 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.
Jagat Narayan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-17-2013
WP 5491.13 Writ Petition No.5491 of 2013 (Jagat Narayan and six others versus The State of Madhya Pradesh and two otheRs.17-04-2013 Shri R. P.Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioneRs.Heard on admission. While seeking quashment of orders dated 19-05-1993 (Annexure-P/4) and 21-03-1996 (Annexure-P/1) petitioners seek direction for regularization. Initially engaged on daily wages in the year 1993, services of the petitioners were dispensed with in the year 2000 which led the petitioners to challenge vide Original Application No.165/2000 before the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. The Original Application was disposed of on 06-03-2000 with the direction to the respondent/State to consider their claim in the light of Circular dated 14-02-2000. Petitioners again preferred a Writ Petition No.7383/2005(s) which was again disposed of on 06-09-2005 to consider their claim, which was considered and rejected by a speaking order dated 24-11-2005 in the following terms :- dk;kZy; vk;qDr Hkw...
Laxmandas Ahirwar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-17-2013
W.A.No.246/2013 17.04.2013 Shri Arvind Pathak, Advocate for the appellant. Shri Jaideep Singh, Dy. G.A.for the State. This appeal is directed against an order dated 22.02.2013 in W.P.No.2466/2013 by which a writ petition preferred by the appellant seeking issuance of directions against the Collector, Tikamgarh to take action on the complaint Annexure P-3, was dismissed. It appears that appellant is seeking the direction against the Sarpanch and Secretary of Gram Panchayat, Bela who have not paid the amount of Rs.53,690/- to the appellant. If the appellant is having any grievance against the Panchayat or against the Sarpanch and Secretary of the Gram Panchayat, the appropriate authority is Sub Divisional Officer concerned and not the Collector. In view of the aforesaid, we find that the appellant has not approached to the appropriate authority for ventilation of his grievance. Accordingly, this writ appeal is finally disposed of, with liberty to the appellant to approach the Sub Divisio...
Mohan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-17-2013
1 M.Cr.C.No.10583/2006 M.Cr.C.No.10583/2006 17.04.2013 Shri Manish Datt, Senior Advocate with Shri Puspendra Dubey, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Pramod Chourasiya, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. Present petition has been preferred under section 482 Cr.P.C against the order dated 11/11/2006 passed by 13 th Additional Sessions Judge, Jabalpur in Sessions Trial No.252/2004 rejecting the application of petitioner under section 311 Cr.P.C for recalling the witnesses Badri Prasad Burman (PW-2).Radhika Burman (PW-3).and Parvesh Kumar Burman (PW-4) for further examination. Petitioner along with other co-accused persons is facing a trial under section 304B, 498A/34 IPC in respect of death of Preeti Burman on 09/05/2003 in the matrimonial house in suspicious condition. Initially petitioner and two other accused persons have been shown absconded in the charge sheet. Statement of Dr. Arun Jain (PW-1) was recorded on 28/07/2004. On 22/09/2004 statements of Badri Prasad Burman (PW-2).Ra...
Vijay Kumar Vs. Kishore Kumar
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-17-2013
Second Appeal No.256/2010 ( Vijay Kumar versus Kishore Kumar ) 17-04-2013 Heard Shri N.S.Ruprah, learned counsel appearing for the appellant on the question of admission. This appeal has been filed by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 10.12.2009 passed in Civil FiRs.Appeal No.5-A/2009 by the FiRs.Additional District Judge, Waraseoni, whereby the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge Class-I Waraseoni, in Civil Appeal No.149-A/2006 has been affirmed and confirmed and the suit filed by the appellant for eviction of the respondent from plot nos.16 and 17 has been dismissed. Though several issues have been raised by the learned counsel for the appellant, it is observed that previously appellant had filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of the same property i.e.plot Nos.16 and 17 which was registered as Civil Suit No.264-A/1991 and was dismissed by the Second Civil Judge Class-II Waraseoni on 21.4.1994 by recording a f...
Aam Janta Th: Santosh Bhai Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-17-2013
---1--- W.P.No.1519/2013 17.4.2013 Shri R. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri P. Kaurav, learned counsel for the State. It is submitted by Shri Kaurav, learned counsel for the State that the controveRs.involved in this case is covered by National Green Tribunal Act 2010 and the matter can be tried by the National Green Tribunal, established at Bhopal and this case may be transferred to said Tribunal. The prayer of Shri Kaurav is not opposed by Shri Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the petitioner, hence the same is allowed. Office to transmit this case to National Green Tribunal, Bhopal for its adjudication. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt. Vimla Jain) Acting Chief Justice Judge AK...
Asif Mohd. Khan Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-17-2013
Object 1 WP 5992.13 Writ Petition No.5992 of 2013 (Asif Mohd. Khan versus The State of Madhya Pradesh and three otheRs.17-04-2013 Shri Shailesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard on admission. Petitioner, a Forest Range Officer, vide this petition seeks quashment of order dated 09-08-2012 and a direction to restrain the respondents from conducting a departmental enquiry till final disposal of Criminal Trial in pursuance to POR Case No.24302/19. While posted at Forest Range Chilwaha, under Territorial Forest Division, Obedullaganj, the petitioner has been subjected to Criminal prosecution vide Forest Offence No.24302/19 dated 07-05-2010 for an offence under sections 2, 9, 39, 51 and 52 of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972, on an allegation that he along with other co-accused are allegedly involved in hunting of a Black Buck. Initially arrested, he has been released on bail on 05-08-2010. Though it is stated that charges have been levelled against the petitioner in the cr...
Vikash @ Chhotu Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-17-2013
Criminal Revision No.2410/2012 17.4.2013 Shri Y.K.Gupta, counsel for the applicants. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. As prayed by the learned counsel for the parties, heard them finally. The applicants have challenged the order dated 13.12.2012 passed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Damoh, whereby the appeal filed by the applicants relating to their bail was dismissed. The facts of the case, in short, are that, the applicants are juvenile. A trial under section 302 or 302 read with section 149 of IPC is going on. It is alleged against the applicants that they killed one Shyam Bai. After considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is apparent that the Probationary Officer concerned has submitted the reports in favour of the applicants. For consideration of bail application of a juvenile, gravity of offence is not much important but, the application should be con...
Makhanlal Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-17-2013
1 M.Cr.C.No.10897/2006 M.Cr.C.No.10897/2006 17.04.2013 Shri Manish Datt, Senior Advocate with Shri Puspendra Dubey, Advocate for the petitioner/husband. Shri Akshay Namdey, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. None for respondent no.2. Present petition has been preferred under section 482 Cr.P.C for quashment of criminal proceedings pending in the court of Sessions Judge, Hoshangabad in Criminal Appeal No.120/2005 under section 498A IPC. Vide impugned order dated 04/11/2006 Sessions court in appellate jurisdiction declined the compromise petition submitted before the court on the ground that offence under section 498A IPC is not compoundable even with the permission of the court and Sessions court has no inherent power like the High Court. On perusal of compromise petition filed in appellate court, it is revealed that petitioner and respondent no.2 are husband and wife have agreed to live together happily and are living together along with their son. In view of the aforesaid further ...
Anamika Verma Vs. Union of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-17-2013
Writ Petition No ::3253. / 2013 Anamika Verma versus Union of India and otheRs.17.04.2013. Shri A.P.Shrivastava for the petitioner. Shri A.P.Singh for the respondents. Keeping in view the return filed by the respondents and the statutory provision as is indicated therein, respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to undertake the summer couRs.with regard to two of the subjects, as may be permissible. With regard to the third subject, petitioner is granted liberty to represent to the competent authority of the respondents institute and the competent authority after examining it in the light of the Rules, if permissible, shall pass appropriate orders on the same within a period of 10 days. With the aforesaid, for the present finding no further direction to be issued, this writ petition is disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. ( RAJENDRA MENo.) ( M.A.SIDDIQUI ) JUDGE JUDGE Aks/-...
Devendra Kumar Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-17-2013
Criminal Revision No.336/2013 17.04.2013 Shri Y.K.Gupta, counsel for the applicants. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. As prayed by learned counsel for the parties, heard them finally. The applicants were convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 294 and 323/34 of IPC vide judgment dated 4.5.2012 passed by the learned J.M.F.C.(Shri Deep Narayan Singh) Waraseoni, District Balaghat in Criminal Case No.30/11 with fine of `300/- and `500/- was imposed upon them respectively. In criminal appeal no.142/12, the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge Waraseoni, District Balaghat vide judgment dated 14.2.2013 dismissed the appeal in toto. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid judgments the applicants have preferred the present revision. The prosecution's case in short is that on 13.1.2011 at about 7:00 p.m.in the evening, the applicants held the victim Preetam (PW-1) at village Chichgaon (Tahslil Waraseoni District Balaghat) and thereafter, they abused him at pub...
- ‹ Prev
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- Next ›
- Last »