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.
Jameel Ahmed Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
1 M.Cr.C.No.15306/12. 08.04.2013. Shri Manish Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for petitioneRs.State by Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, learned PL. Call for the case diary and then list for admission. Heard on IA No.26610/12, an application for stay of further proceedings. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that no marriage was performed and petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case in order to bring pressure to do the marriage. His submission is that in Criminal Revision No.103/12 filed by petitioners , learned Addl.Judge to the Court of Ist Addl.Sessions Judge, Panna has quashed the charge under Section 3 of Dowry Prohibition Act, not only section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act remains which is also not attracted. Counsel submits that case is fixed for framing of charge and if the charge is framed, then this petition will become futile. Looking to the circumstances of the case, further proceedings in Criminal Case No.1795/12, pending before Judl.Magistrate Ist Class, Panna shall rema...
Prem Singh Lodhi Patel Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
1 M.Cr.C.No.580/13 09.04.13. Shri Pradeep Singh, Adv.for the petitioner. Shri Satya Pal Singh Chadar, PL for the respondent- State. Heard on the point of admission. The petition seems to be arguable, hence admitted for final hearing. Also heard on IA No.1030/13, an application for grant of stay of further proceedings in Criminal Case No.3880 of 2012. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the offence of abetment to commit suicide by Harlal. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was demanding money and thereby he instigated the deceased to commit suicide. Counsel submits that merely by demanding the money, it cannot be said that petitioner has instigated the deceased to commit suicide. Looking to the circumstances of the case, it is directed that further proceedings of Criminal Case No.3880/12 pending before Judl.Magistrate Ist Class, Narsinghpur shall remain stayed till next date of heaing. List for final hearing immediately aft...
Umesh Singh Baghel Vs. Smt. Sunhari Bai
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
1 M.Cr.C.No.1381/13 8.4.2013. Shri Rahul Tripathi, Advocate for petitioneRs.Petitioner/husband is also present in person. Respondent/wife is also present in person. Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, PL for State. Parties have been identified by Shri Rahul Tripathi, Advocate. Their presence be recorded. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.has been filed by the petitioners in order to invoke the extra ordinary jurisdiction to quash the proceedings against petitioners registered under Sections 313,314, 323,325,294,506 Part II, 498-A/34 of IPC and section 3/4of Dowry Prohibition Act as the matter has been compromised. I enquired from petitioner/husband and respondent/wife. They informed me that matter has been compromised . They want to enter into a compromise. Counsel submits that since the matter is not compoundable learned trial Court has rejected the 2 compromise. He submits that parties have also filed IA No.8175/13 an application under Section 320 of Cr.P.C.for giving permission to compromise...
Anupam JaIn Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
1 M.Cr.C.No.4054/13 8.4.2013. Shri Ajay Kumar Jain, Advocate for petitioneRs.Shri S.Chile, Govt. Advocate for State. Heard. Call for the case diary then list for admission. Also heard on admission. Issue notice to respondent no.2 to show cause against admission by both modes,i.e.by ordinary as well as RAD post. Steps within a week. Notice be made returnable within four weeks. Heard on IA No.7357/13, an application for grant of stay. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that marriage of complainant/respondent no.2 was performed with petitioner no.1/Anupam Jain on 27.05.10 at Sagar and from 18.4.12 respondent no.2 is residing separately. On 22.8.12 the petitioners sent a legal notice . Thereafter on 28.08.12 the petitioner no.1 also made an application before Family Counselling Centre, 2 Sagar. After that, on 29.8.12 respondent no.2 filed a case for maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.against petitioner no.1. On 3.10.12 petitioner filed a civil suit under Section 9 of Hindu Marria...
Kushal Singh Dangi Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
1 W.P.No.3943/2013 Kushal Singh Dangi & another State of M.P.& others 8.4.2013 Petitioner Kushal Singh Dangi alongwith counsel Shri Vivek Shukla, present. Petitioner Kushal Singh Dangi has been identified by counsel Shri Vivek Shukla. We have shown the affidavit sworn by Kushal Singh Dangi and also Vakalatnama executed in the name of the counsel to Kushal Singh Dangi. It is stated by him that affidavit dated 6.3.2013 bears his signatures and Vakalatnama dated 6.3.2013 also bears his signature in front of his name. He has also been shown the record of W.P.No.4175/2013 in which Vakalatnama executed in the name of counsel namely Smt.Shimla Jain and others has been filed. It is stated by him that the signature appearing in front of his name is not his signature. In view of aforesaid, hearing of this case is adjourned for 9.4.2013. On the aforesaid date, petitioner Kushal Singh Dangi shall remain personally present before this Court. (Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (B.D.Rathi) Judge Judge C....
Jayprakash Vs. Rameshchandra
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
1 MCRC No 9854/2011 8.4.2013 Shri T. Bajpayee, Adv.for the applicant. Shri Imtiyaz Hussain, Advocate, for respondent no.1 to 4. Shri S.P.S.Chadar, PL for State/Respondent no.5. Heard on IA No.6998/13 an application for conversion this petition into Criminal Revision. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that he wants to convert this petition into Cri.Revision. Since this application is not opposed by other side hence aforesaid IA is allowed. Petitioner is permitted to carry out necessary amendment in the cause title within three days. Office is directed on such conversion into criminal revision register this case into Criminal revision and list it before appropriate bench as per roster. (M.A.Siddiqui ) JUDGE Ag/...
Poorandas Kotwar Vs. Collector of Distt. Mandla
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : AT JABALPUR Writ Petition No :4391. of 2011 Poorandas Kotwar and others - V/s - Collector, District Mandla and otheRs.Present : Honble Shri Justice Rajendra Menon. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri P.N.Das, counsel for the petitioneRs.Shri Sanjeev Kumar Singh, PL, for the respondents. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Whether approved for reporting: Yes / No.ORDER 08/04/2013 Petitioners claim to be in possession of certain agricultural land, which was given to their ancestors much prior to coming into force of the M P Land Revenue Code, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as Code).It is stated that in the settlement process that was conducted sometime in the year 1923-1924, the then Zamindars / Malgujars of the land gave the land to the ancestors of the petitioneRs.as they were working as Kotwars and since then the petitioners are in possession of the ...
In Reference Vs. Shri Ramesh Kol [Rawat]
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
CONCR No.9/2012 08.04.2013 Shri Vijay Pandey, Deputy Advocate General, for the State. Shri Raman Patel, Advocate along with contemners Ramesh Kol and V.P.Singh are present. Both the contemners have filed their unconditional apology. It is submitted by Ramesh Kol that it was by mistake and in future he will not repeat such a mistake and he may be pardoned for the aforesaid act. The another contemner V.P.Singh submits that he is a lawyer of one year standing and was unable to understand the legal position. It is also submitted by him that in future he shall not repeat such a mistake. Shri Raman Patel, learned counsel appearing for the contemners submits that it is start of the career of the counsel, and if at this stage, he is punished, his entire career shall be ruined. The facts of the case are that contemner Ramesh Kol filed W.P.No.12494/2012(S) challenging his transfer order. The contemner No.1 Ramesh Kol was represented by contemner No.2 V.P.Singh. The fiRs.petition i.e.W.P.No.12494...
Brahma Narayan Singh Vs. Man Singh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
W.P.No.5735/2013 08-04-2013 Shri Kishore Shrivastava, learned senior counsel with Shri S.R.Tamrakar, for the petitioner. Shri Prashant Singh, learned Addl. A.G.for the respondents No.14, 15 and 16. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. We find that the respondents No.1 to 13 are not served, however, having regard to the circumstances of the case and the fact that we do not propose to pass any order adveRs.to the interest of the aforesaid respondents, we consider it appropriate to dispose of the matter at this stage. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties we find that the matter, namely, the confirmation and vacation of the exparte order was directed to be heard by the Tribunal on 21st of March, 2013 and that a final order in that regard is yet to be passed. For the same reason we consider it sufficient in the interest of justice to direct the Additional Registrar of the Cooperative Societies (Judicial) to consider the question of confirmation or vacat...
Anushree Shukla Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-08-2013
W.P.No.5195/2013 8.4.2013 Shri Pratyush Tripathi, counsel for petitioner. Shri Jaideep Singh, Dy.G.A., for respondent nos.1 & 2. Looking to the short controveRs.and prayer made by the petitioner, we propose to dispose of this petition with the consent of the parties. The petitioner has sought following reliefs :- (1) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire record. (2) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ/order/ command directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner and allow the petitioner to prosecute her studies in the respondent no.3 college. (3) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also be passed together cost of petition. The case of the petitioner is that she belongs to General category, however she was required to submit her caste certificate at the time of allocation to the College. The petitioner could not produce the caste certificate even on the last date, which was 25...
- ‹ Prev
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- Next ›
- Last »