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.
Dhanraj Singh Prajapati Vs. Nagar Palik Nigam, Jabalpur
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
W.P.No.3297/2013 2.4.2013 Shri R.K.Thakur, counsel for petitioner. Shri Ishan Mehta, counsel for respondents. The petitioner has sought following reliefs in this petition :- (i) That, the respondents be directed to consider and decide the petitioner's objection Ann.P/2 and P/3 by a speaking order and till then, the coercive step adopted by them before giving due date as 31.03.2013, those step be stayed as mentioning status-quo, in the interest of justice. (ii) That, the assessment of the property tax in question be quashed and the respondents be directed to re-assess and settle the account. (iii) Petition be allowed with cost. (iv) Any other relief/order or direction which this Court deems fit and proper also be passed in favour of petitioner, in the ends of justice. The controveRs.involved in this case is very short one. The respondents have initiated proceedings against the petitioner for recovery of property tax. As per the petitioner, the petitioner has deposited substantial amount...
Kalyan Singh Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3467/2013 2.4.2013 Shri Ajay Pal Singh, counsel for the applicant. Shri Akhilendra Kumar Singh, for the State. Heard finally. This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.The applicant is in custody since 12.2.2013 in connection with Crime No.79/2012 registered at Police Station Mohangarh, District Tikamgarh for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366 r/w Section 34 of IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Prosecutrix Pooja went with this applicant on her own free will. They solemnized their marriage and thereafter they blessed a child. Since father of the prosecutrix is not agree with this marriage, he falsely implicated this applicant in the case. Charge sheet has already been filed and trial would take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, prays for grant of bail to applicant. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer. On due consideration of the contentions raised by the couns...
Banti @ Idrees Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3671/2013 2.4.2013 Shri Shivam Singh, counsel for the applicant. Shri R.K.Kesharwani, PL, for the State. Heard. This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.The applicant is in custody since 26.2.2013 in connection with Crime No.47/2013 registered at Police Station Beena, District Sagar for offence punishable under Sections 307, 324, 294, 506 of IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Injured Bunty has already been discharged from the hospital. Charge sheet has already been filed and trial would take considerable time for its conclusion, therefore, prays for grant of bail to applicant. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer. On due consideration of the contentions raised by the counsel for the parties along with facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that it is a...
Dinesh Shrivastava Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
Cr.R.No.392/2008 2.4.2013 Shri Vijay Naik, counsel for the applicant. Shri Prakash Gupta, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The applicant has challenged the order dated 4.2.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Panna in Criminal Appeal No.10 of 2006 whereby it was directed that the trial Court should examine the witnesses A.K.Shrivastava and R.K.Jain under Section 391 of Cr.P.C and thereafter, record be directed back to the appellate Court. The facts of the case in short is that the applicant was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 420, 465 of I.P.C and sentenced by the trial Court. He moved an appeal before the appellate authority which was pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Panna. Thereafter, the learned Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Panna passed the impugned order on its own motion. If an appeal is filed by the applicant then in absence of th...
Rajendra Nivariya Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
1 MCRC. No.2793 /2013 2.4.2013 Shri Kapil Sharma, Adv.for the petitioner/applicant. Shri Rohani Prasad Tiwar, G.A.for state. Heard on an application u/s 439 Cr.P.C.This is fiRs.bail application of applicant, who is arrested on 12.2.2013 in connection with crime no.98/2013 registered at PS Piplani Dist. Bhopal MP for the offence punishable u/ss. 363, 366 of IPC . Allegation against the applicant is that he abducted/kidnapped the prosecutrix a minot girl from the lawful guardianship of his father Makhanlal Chapela. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case, there is no allegation about rape and the prosecutrix being an average age and her age is two months' short for 18 years the age of major. The applicant is only 19 yeaRs.of age and he is a student of B. Co.FiRs.year and the trial will take considerable long time for disposal hence he be released on bail. Learned counsel for the State has objected for grant of bail on the ground th...
Prabhakar Vs. Tarachan
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR First Appeal No.579/2012 Prabhakar.Appellant/defendant Versus Tarachand and another.... Respondents/plaintiffs For the appellant : Shri A. S. Jha, Senior Advocate, with Shri A. K. Tiwari, Advocate. For the respondents: Shri Kishore Shrivastava, Senior Advocate, with Shri Kapil Jain, Advocate. ****** Present: HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE AJIT SINGH HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE M. K. MUDGAL ****** JUDGMENT (2.4.2013) The following judgment of the Court was delivered by: M. K. Mudgal, J.The appellant/defendant has filed the appeal on 6.6.2012 under section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code being aggrieved with the judgment and decree dated 11.4.2012 passed by the Court of District Judge East Nimar, Khandwa decreeing the civil suit no.5-A/2011 in favour of the plaintiff/ respondent directing the appellant/defendant to execute the sale deed in his favour as per agreement dated 13.7.2010 Ex.P/5 (hereinafter the appellant is called the defendant and respondent the ...
Laxmi Narayan Parashar Vs. Hukumchand Parashar (Dead) Through Lrs Smt. ...
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
1 W.P.No.13187/2012 2/4/2013: Shri Shekhar Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sameer Seth, learned counsel for the respondents. Challenge in this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is made to an interlocutory order dated 17.7.2012 passed by the IXth Additional District Judge, Bhopal in Regular Civil Suit No.112A/2006. By the said order an application filed under Order 7 Rule 14 (3) CPC by the respondent- plaintiff has been allowed and is belated. Even though various grounds are raised challenging the order passed taking the documents on record and permitting it to be exhibited in evidence but the main contention is that document is taken on record at the stage of conclusion of plaintiff's evidence. Be it as it may be, the fact remains that the documents are certified copy of certain revenue entries and they are relevant for deciding the issue in dispute. Merely on the ground of delay it is not appropriate to disallow the application, petitioner can be com...
Pramilesh Kumar Sharma Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
M.Cr.C.No.3912/2013 2.4.2013 Shri Neeraj Nahar, Advocate for the applicant. Shri R.K.Kesarwani, PL for the State. Shri R.K.Khare, Advocate for the objector. Admit. Call for the case diary. Heard on I.A.No.7178/2013, an application for grant of ad-interim anticipatory bail to the applicant. The applicant apprehends his arrest in connection with Crime No.40/2013 registered at P.S.Bameetha, District Chhatarpur, for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of the IPC and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. He is a government employee/teacher. The examinations are going on. It is a matrimonial matter, in the event of arrest, the chances of compromise between the parties, if any, will be diminished, therefore, applicant be released on ad-interim anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for State and the objector have opposed the application. On due consideration of the contention raised by the learne...
Smt. Gulab Bai Dubey Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
1 W.P.No.10906/2012 & W.P.No.12135/2012 2/4/2013: Shri AdaRs.Muni Trivedi, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Tripathi for the petitioner. Shri Rajesh Tiwari, learned Govt.Adv.for the respondents State. Shri Anshuman Singh, learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation. Heard learned counsel for the parties on the report submitted by the learned Court Commissioner and the application filed by the Municipal Corporation being I.A.No.11593/2012 with regard to taking documents on record and the submissions made in the said application indicating facilities which is provided by the Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur in the newly located bus stand which is being developed in Pisanhari ki Madiya, near Medical College, Jabalpur. From the statements made by learned Court Commissioner it is clear that no facilities were available on the date he had inspected the premises and submitted the report. Shri Anshuman Singh invited my attention to the additional submissions made by the Municipal Corporation ...
Ramashankar Shukla Vs. the State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Madhya Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-02-2013
M.Cr.C.No.1084/2013 2.4.2013 Shri Mrigendra Singh, Advocate for the applicant. Shri R.K.Kesarwani, PL for the State. Shri Pushpendra Dubey, Advocate for the objector. 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 25.12.2012 in connection with Crime No.405/2012 registered at P.S.Rampur Naikin, District Sidhi for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 327, 386/34 of the IPC. As per prosecution, it is alleged that initially, Dhirendra and Sanju extorted Rs.15 Lakhs from complainant Shrikant and the applicant came in the second part of the incident where complainant was abducted and kept in a vehicle. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case because there was a previous enmity between the parties and Pramod Kumar, brother of applicant lodged report against complainant party. The applicant has no criminal past. Charge sheet has bee...
- ‹ Prev
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- Next ›
- Last »