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.
Shankar Vs. Phool Singh Lodhi
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-16-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH PRESENT : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. K. GUPTA CRIMINAL REVISION NO.926/1999 Shankar Vs. Phool Singh Lodhi and 7 others ................................................................................................. Shri Abhinav Dubey, counsel for the applicant. Shri Rajnish Choubey, counsel for the respondents no.1 to 7. Shri S. K. Kashyap, Public Prosecutor for the respondent no.8/State. .................................................................................................... ORDER (Delivered on the 16th day of April, 2013) The applicants have challenged the judgment dated 26.3.1999 passed by the JMFC, Udaipura, District Raisen (Shri K. N. Khan) in Criminal Case No.178 of 1997 whereby the respondents no.1 to 7 were acquitted from the charges of offences punishable under Sections 294, 147, 148, 325, 324, 323 read with Section 149 of I.P.C.2. The prosecution's case in short is that on 5.2.1997 the complainant Shankar @ Gudd...
Raju Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-16-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH PRESENT : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. K. GUPTA CRIMINAL REVISION NO.1136/1999 Raju Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. ................................................................................................. Shri Rajendra Raghuwanshi, counsel for the applicant. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. .................................................................................................... ORDER (Delivered on the 16th day of April, 2013) The applicant is convicted for offence punishable under Section 498-A of I.P.C vide judgment dated 1.10.1997 passed by the JMFC, Bhaisdehi, District Betul in Criminal Case No.447/1994 and he was sentenced for two years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.200/-. In Criminal Appeal No.65/1997 the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Betul vide judgment dated 7.7.1999 dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid judgments the applicant has preferred the pres...
Mahesh Kumar and anr Vs. Himmat Singh and ors
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-16-2013
Second Appeal No.888 / 2004 (Mahesh Kumar & another versus Himmat Singh & otheRs.16-04-2013 Smt. Shobha Menon, learned senior counsel with Ms.Surabhi Ahirkar, for the appellants. Shri Imtiaz Hussain, learned counsel for the respondents. The appellants/defendants have filed this appeal being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 3-7-2004 passed by the 5th Additional District Judge, Bhopal, in R.C.A.No.11-A/2004, confirming and affirming the judgment and decree dated 3-7-2003 passed by the FiRs.Additional Civil Judge, Bhopal, in C.S.No.94-A/2002. The brief facts leading to the filing of this appeal are that the respondents/plaintiffs had filed a suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of KhaSr.No.184, area 1.16 acres of village Pipalner, Tahsil Huzur, District Bhopal against the appellants/defendants alleging that the property belong to them but had wrongly been taken in possession by the appellants/defendants. The suit was opposed by the appellants/defenda...
Niranjan Lodhi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-16-2013
M.Cr.C.No.4107/2013 16/04/2013 Shri R.S.Patel, Advocate for the applicants. Shri Vivek Lakhera, PL for the respondent/State. Heard finally. This is the fiRs.application filed by applicants under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C for grant of bail. Applicants have been arrested on 15/03/13 in connection with Crime No.58/13 registered at P.S.Gourjhamar, District Sagar for the offence punishable under sections 147, 148, 327, 427, 336, 506, 329 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that all the offences are triable by Magistrate. Charge sheet has already been filed and trial would take considerable time to be disposed of finally therefore, he prays for bail to these applicants. Learned counsel for the State opposes the application. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case alongwith the nature of allegation made against these applicants, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case...
Sunil Yadav Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
M.Cr.C.No.77/2013 15.4.2013 Shri Manish Datt, Senior Advocate alongwith Shri Rahul Sharma, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Puneet Shroti, Panel Lawyer for the State/ respondent No.1. Heard on admission. The applicant has challenged the order dated 31.8.2012 passed by the learned FiRs.Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in criminal revision No.592/2012, whereby the revision was dismissed and the order dated 12.10.2012 passed by the learned JMFC, Bhopal (Shri Alok Mishra) in an unregistered complaint was affirmed, whereby the application under section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C.filed by the applicant was dismissed. The applicant has preferred a complaint against the respondents No.2 to 4 that a land having area of 0.570 Hectares is situated at village Salaiya and names of the respondents No.3 and 4 are shown as landlords on that land. The respondent No.2 entered into an agreement with the applicant that he wanted to sell the land in a sum of Rs.1,76,85,360/- and he has also informed that he wo...
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Bhopal Vs. M/S Chandan Woods Products
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
M.C.C.No.432 15. 04-2013 Shri Lokesh Jain, learned counsel for the applicant. Shri Shekhar Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent. Heard on the application for restoration of M.A.No.542/2001. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that being busy in attending a case before another Bench he could not attend hearing of the aforesaid appeal when the same was taken up for hearing on 12-3-2013 which resulted in dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution. It is further submitted that the reasons for non- appearance of the appellant before the Court are bona fide and the same being sufficient and justified cause, the second appeal be restored to its original number. The application is supported by an affidavit and as the reasons stated therein appear to be bona fide, the application for restoration is allowed. M.A.No.542/2001 be restored to its original number. A copy of this order be placed in the record of M.A.No.542/2001. M.C.C.stands allowed accordingly. (R.S.Jh...
Manoj Kumar Uikey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
WP 5541.13 Writ Petition No.5541 of 2013 (Manot Kumar Uikey versus The State of M.P.and four otheRs.15-04-2013 Shri G.S.Uddey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard on admission. Aggrieved of his non-selection on the post of Gram Rojgar Sahayak, Dulhari, Janapad Panchayat at Mehadwani, district-Dindori, and having been unsuccessful in Appeal preferred before Collector, who dismissed the same by order dated 03-12-2012, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking quashment of appointment of respondent No.5 and for direction to consider the petitioner for appointment by granting 15 marks in lieu of Diploma in Computer Application. Apparently, the petitioner has not been selected because he does not have to his credit the Diploma in Computer Application, one of the qualification for appointment to the post of Gram Rojgar Sahayak. The certificate on the strength whereof the petitioner sought appointment is issued by a Charitable Trust, named and styled as Rajeev Gandhi Computer ...
Mehar Yadav Vs. Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
Criminal Revision No.780/2012 15.04.2013 Shri Avinash Jargar, counsel for the applicant. Shri Brajesh Choubey, counsel for the respondent. With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the present revision is hereby disposed of with the direction that the complainant shall make the applicant to be a separate party being an owner of the house, whose name the connection was given. Also the concerned tenant be made a party, who was actually using that connection. Similarly, M/s Prachi Infrastructure Finance Limited shall be made as accused No.2 through the Director Ravi Todi, whose address will be provided by the applicant and accused No.3 shall be made to be M/s Magma Finance Limited through the Director Ravi Todi. A complaint shall be made against owner of the house and the tenant because the electric meter was in the name of the applicant and the tenant was the actual person, who was using that electric meter. The complainant shall comply such amendments before the trial Court w...
Rajendra Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SB: HON. SHRI N.K.GUPTA,J.CRIMINAL REVISION NO.108/2013 Rajendra Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Neeraj Nahar, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 15th day of April, 2013) The applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under Sections, 279 and 304-A of IPC vide judgment dated 5.9.2012 passed by the Nyayadhikari, Gram Nyalaya, Sagar (Shri Ramji Gupta) in Criminal Case No.37/2011 and sentenced for the offence under Section 304-A of IPC with two years' RI with fine of Rs.1000/-. In Criminal Appeal No.437/2012 the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Sagar vide judgment dated 16.1.2013 dismissed the appeal in toto. Being aggrieved with both the judgments, the applicant has fil...
Raisingh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-15-2013
M.Cr.C.No.1959/2013 15/04/2013 Shri Mukesh Pandey, Advocate for the applicant. Shri C.K.Mishra, GA for the respondent/State. Heard finally. This is the second application filed by applicant under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C for grant of bail. The fiRs.application was dismissed on merits by this Court vide order dated 20/07/2012. Applicant has been arrested on 29/05/2012 in connection with Crime No.207/12 registered at P.S.Amarwada, District Chhindwara for the offence punishable under sections 294, 324, 506, 307 read with section 34 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that after dismissal of the fiRs.application as many as four witnesses have been examined. Trial would take considerable time to dispose of finally, in these circumstances, he prays for bail to the applicant. Learned counsel for the State opposes the application. On due consideration of the contention raised on behalf of parties alo...
- ‹ Prev
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- Next ›
- Last »