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.
Rajesh Alias Buttu Burman Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
M.Cr.C.No.2810/2013 3.4.2013 Shri Deepak Panjwani, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Chandrakant Mishra, 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 25.2.2012 in connection with Crime No.50/2012 registered at P.S.Badwara, District Katni for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 of the IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Other co-accused persons have been released on bail. 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. I have perused the case diary. It is alleged against the applicant that he assaulted deceased Vipul by a knife (sharp edged weapon).As per the post mortem report, Vipul sustained as many as 5 incised wounds and ultimately succumbed to the said injur...
Ssangyong Engineering and Construction Co.Ltd Vs. National Highway Aut ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
W.P.No.4770/2013 Ssangyong Engineering and Construction Co.versus National Highway Authority of India and others 03.04.2013 Smt. Indira Nair, learned senior counsel with Shri Rajas Pohankar, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Mohan Sousarkar, learned counsel for the respondents. In the present petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 15.02.2013 passed by the respondents/authorities contending that the aforesaid circular is not applicable to the contract entered between the parties by which the respondents have changed the base year of wholesale price index from 1993-94 to 2004-05 incorporating a linking factor which is de hors the condition of the contract greatly causing prejudice to the petitioner as it alters the price index as given in the condition of the contract which is applicable on both the parties. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and having perused the petition including the document Annexure P/6, we are not inclined to grant any relief...
Moti Lal Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
1 MCRC. No 1862 /2012 3.4.2013 Shri P.K.Mishra, Adv.for the petitioner/s. Shri Ramesh Kushwaha, PL for State/respondent. Heard finally at motion stage with the consent of both the parties. This petition u/s 482 Cr.PC has been preferred in order to quash impugned orders dated 1.11.2011 by which learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amarpatan District Satna in Criminal Revision223/2011 has refused to release Motor Cycle on Supradnama. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is registered owner of the motor cycle not MP-17-MA-5666 which was taken by the relatives of the petitioner for ride who was murdered and the motor cycle was stolen. Later on an accident took place from this vehicle and this vehicle was seized. Trial Court refused to give motor cycle on supratnama on the ground that vehicle could be required for the purpose of evidence in the case against which a revision was filed fiRs.revision was dismissed on the ground that ownership was not proved. Finally on ...
Smt. Geeta Rathore Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
Writ Petition No.5383/2013 3.4.2013 Shri D.K.Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Rahul Jain, Deputy Advocate General, for the State. The petitioner submits that she has raised a dispute regarding the caste certificate of Smt. Sandhya Jat before the respondents in the year 2010 but till this date, despite the completion of inquiry, no final order has been passed. She has, therefore, prayed that the respondents be directed to decide the dispute registered as Smt. Geeta Rathor v. Smt. Sandhya Jat without any further delay. The learned Deputy Advocate General has fairly agreed to this prayer of the petitioner. Having regard to the grievance of petitioner, I also find the prayer reasonable. This petition is accordingly finally disposed of with a direction to the respondents to decide the dispute raised by the petitioner regarding the caste of Smt. Sandhya Jat as early as possible without granting unnecessary adjournments. Certified copy as per rules. JUDGE ps...
Kalpana Ravidas Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
1.... W.P. No.4556 of 2013 Kalpana Ravidas & ors State of M.P. & ors. 03.04.2013 Shri J.N. Tripathi with Shri Ravendra Tiwari, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Agrawal, G.A. for respondents No.1 to 5. Petitioner has sought following reliefs :- 1. The Hon. Court may kindly direct to respondents to consider the case of petitioners and give the scholarship to the petitioners like to others same category student.2. The Hon. Court may kindly direct to refund the fees of petitioner which was deposited.3. Other relief which deem fit and proper.4. Cost of petition be also awarded. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that as per the order issued by the Government of India dated 31.12.2010 Annexure P-5, the petitioners who belongs to Scheduled Caste category are not liable to make payment of tuition fee to the Government or private colleges. Similar directions have also been issued by the Commissioner, Scheduled Caste Development, Madhya Pradesh dated 23.6.2011 Annexure P-7 and d...
Gajanan Agro India Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Central Bank of India
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
W.P.No.6223/2013 03/04/2013 Shri P.R.Bhave, learned Sr.Advocate with Shri B.P.Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vivek Khedkar, learned counsel on advance notice for the respondents. Challenging the proceedings initiated by the respondent/ Bank for auctioning of the property in question and seeking stay of the auction as contained in Annexure-P3 dated 3.3.2013, petitioner has filed this writ petition. The property in question originally belonged to Respondent Nos.2 and 3, who were granted certain loans by the Central Bank of India and the property was mortgaged with the respondent/Bank. It is not the case of the petitioner that petitioner has purchased the property bearing khaSr.no.17/2 Village Kalikhedi District-Hoshangabad totaling area 2.25 acres. An area of 1.25 acre has been purchased by the petitioner by registered sale-deed dated 16.7.2012, whereas for rest of the portion i.e.one acre, a lease has been granted in favour of the petitioner vide lease dated 16.7.2012. ...
Smt. Vimla UsraThe Vs. the Collector
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
W.P.No.5352/2013 03/04/2013 Shri AdaRs.Muni Trivedi, learned Sr.Advocate with Shri Ashish Trivedi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Admit. Issue notice to the respondents on payment of P.F within one week, returnable in four weeks. Prima-facie, from the material available on record, it is seen that petitioner has not been dispossessed, she is still in possession and, therefore, by virtue of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, not possession cannot be taken over. Respondents are directed not to disturb the possession of the petitioner and status-quo in the matter, as is existing today, shall be maintained until further ordeRs.Certified Copy as per rules. (Rajendra Menon) Judge nd...
Bhoora Prasad Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3981/2013 3.4.2013 Shri Satyendra Patel, Advocate for the applicants. Shri Akhilendra Singh, GA for the State. Admit. Call for the case diary. Heard on I.A.No.7275/2013, an application for grant of ad-interim anticipatory bail to the applicants. The applicants apprehend their arrest in connection with Crime No.100/2013 registered at P.S.Amarpatan, District Satna for the offences punishable under Section 498-A/34 of the IPC. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. Applicant No.1 is grandfather-in-law, applicant No.2 is father-in-law and applicant No.3 is mother-in-law of complainant Pushpa. Since Nilesh, husband of complainant had filed a matrimonial case under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act in the month of January, 2013, as a counter blast of the same, the complainant lodged false and concocted report against her husband and the applicants. Counsel has further submitted that it is a matrimonial case, in the eve...
Rudra Praap Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
M.Cr.C.No.2843/2013 3.4.2013 Ms.Premlata Lokhande, Advocate for the applicants. Shri Chandrakant Mishra, GA for the State. This is the fiRs.bail application filed by the applicants under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.for grant of bail. The applicants are in custody since 7.12.2012 in connection with Crime No./P.O.R.No.3282/2003 (Criminal Case No.4514/2010 pending before JMFC, Narsinghpur) registered at P.S.Suatala, District Narsinghpur for the offence punishable under Section 26(5)(A) of the India Forest Act. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the case. The offence is triable by the Magistrate. Charge sheet has been filed. 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 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 ...
Hakku Kaurav Vs. the State of M.P.
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, JABALPUR SINGLE BENCH : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.GUPTA, J.Criminal Revision No.1884/1999 Hakku Kaurav VERSUS The State of Madhya Pradesh --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri A.D.Mishra, Advocate for the applicant. Shri Ajay Tamrakar, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ORDER (Passed on the 4th day of April, 2013) The applicant was convicted for the offence punishable under section 39 of the Electricity Act and section 506 (Part-I) of IPC vide judgment dated 8.2.1999 passed by the JMFC, Gadarwara (Shri Amitabh Mishra) in criminal case No.359/1995 and sentenced for 1 year's rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.500/- and 6 months' rigorous imprisonment respectively. In criminal appeal No.27/1999 the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gadarwara District Narsinghpur vide judgment dated 27.12.1999 dismissed the appeal in toto. Being ag...